veredicto

Verdict (v1)

Goal

Answer with evidence "does this work unit meet its spec?". The verdict is not an opinion: each point carries a command, a test or a archivo:línea that backs it, or it remains NO VERIFICADO.

Input

• The work document (SPRINT0.md) — the spec against which it is judged.
• The reports of ENTREGA TESTER and ENTREGA DEV.
• The route ownership map in AGENTS.md.
• The work branch and its starting point (git merge-base against the main branch).

If either of the two deliveries is missing, no verdict is issued: it waits.

Workflow

1. Verify route ownership. List which files each commit of the cycle touched: git log <base>..HEAD --name-only --format="%s". Group by prefix ([TESTER] / [DEV]) and compare against the map of AGENTS.md. Each file outside the role's routes is a finding, even if the tests pass. A commit without a prefix is also a finding.

2. Run the TESTER's tests against the DEV's code, with the command indicated by the TESTER's report. Save the output.

3. Verify each point of the DoD, in order:

   • 🟢 — there is evidence that it is met (test in green, command with expected output, or archivo:línea).
   • 🔴 — there is evidence that it is not met.
   • NOT VERIFIED — there is no way to check it with what is available. It is never set to green "by inspection" nor by what a report says.

4. For each 🔴, decide to whom it is returned according to the evidence:

   • the test is consistent with the spec and the code does not meet it → DEV;
   • the test demands something that the spec does not say, or the opposite of the spec → TESTER;
   • the spec admits more than one reading → human (no agent corrects it). Return with the exact point, the evidence and the quote from the spec.

5. Count rounds. If the same disagreement has already come back twice, a third is not returned: it is escalated to the human.

6. Write the verdict in informes/VEREDICTO-<unidad>.md:

   • DoD table with result and evidence;
   • route ownership findings;
   • returns made (to whom, why, round N);
   • list of NO VERIFICADO for human decision.

7. If everything is green (or the NO VERIFICADO were accepted by the human), the LEAD opens the PR with the verdict in the description.

Constraints

• No code or tests are modified to "make the verdict pass".
• What the reports say is not trusted: it is verified.
• Nothing is published (neither push to main, nor merge).