Worksheet: choices, evidence and the next decision
H.A.R.D. Protocol 0.2 · Public Preview
Use paper or existing notes. The facilitator can maintain the detailed machine record. Completing this worksheet does not authenticate evidence or grant a favorable result.
Set the boundary
Artifact / revision / date: ______ Purpose / affected people: ______
Route: artifact_review / engineering_commitment / independent_evaluation
Stage: specification_handoff / prototype_handoff / implementation_review / runtime_release_review
Artifact population: ai_generated / runtime_ai / both / neither / unknown
Current scope: ______ Deferred or excluded items and reasons: ______
Reviewer kind: ______ Role overlaps and reference access: ______
Criteria fixed when, before or after viewing the artifact? ______ Owner of next decision: ______
Inspect one consequential choice
| Question | Record |
|---|---|
| What is actually chosen, and where? | Choice ID, observed behavior and source location: ______ |
| What purpose and criteria should it meet? | Outcome, affected people, priorities and acceptance conditions: ______ |
| What reason was recorded at the time? | Documented / reported / unknown, source: ______ |
| What alternatives were recorded or are newly proposed? | Historical alternatives with sources: ______. New alternatives: ______ |
| What are the effects and tradeoffs? | Benefits, costs, assumptions, conflicting priorities and limits: ______ |
| What evidence supports or questions the choice? | Sources and validation result: ______ |
| What does a person decide now? | Current rationale, labeled new when appropriate: ______. Accepted / revise / pending: ______ |
| What happens next? | Action or revisit condition: ______. Owner: ______ |
Repeat only for consequential choices. No need to replace an appropriate original choice. An unrecorded reason stays unrecorded; a plausible explanation is new analysis.
Record requirement and recovery evidence
| Item and acceptance check | Scope and reason | Specified | Walkthrough | Implemented | Runtime tested |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ______ | ______ | ______ | ______ | ______ | ______ |
For each level, record pass, fail, unassessed or justified not_applicable plus a source location. Do not collapse the columns. Current unassessed items remain in the denominator. A future-scope exclusion cannot conceal a dependency necessary for the current claim.
Finding / expected vs observed / location: ______ Current applicability: ______
Proposed severity and basis: ______ Accepted, unsupported, duplicate or unresolved: ______
Confirmed severity, if actually reviewed: ______ Remediation and verification: ______
Complete the minimum artifact review
Declared-stage result: ______ Evidence that supports it: ______
Choices retained: ______ Open decisions: ______ Findings requiring repair: ______
Next action / owner / revisit trigger: ______
Reviewer metrics: N/A unless eligible under independent evaluation. Reason for each N/A: ______
Preparation / session effort, if recorded: ______ Do not invent retrospectively measured times.
This route does not require a measured baseline or ROI estimate. It does not issue an engineering recommendation or deployment approval.
If funding engineering, complete all six gates
| Gate | Additional evidence |
|---|---|
| G1: What happens today? | Observed current case, connected steps, time, touches, failures, review, escalation, rework, volume and observation window: ______ |
| G2: What needs to improve, for whom? | Actual need, alternatives, requirements, affected roles and impact checks: ______ |
| G3: What happens on failure? | Connected states and recovery, dependencies, authority boundaries, data preservation and owner: ______ |
| G4: What demonstrates behavior? | Requirement, exact artifact and requirement/context fingerprints, executed validation and result: ______ |
| G5: What work remains for people? | Disjoint review, correction, escalation, rework and residual manual minutes; cost assumptions: ______ |
| G6: What bounded step is justified? | Risk depth, human evidence-quality review, findings, owner, resource cap and next review trigger: ______ |
Apply the full risk rules before selecting QUICK6 or FULL. QUICK6 stops at the first failed or missing gate; later gates are NOT_EVALUATED, and known critical findings remain visible. Preserve a stopped record before a new linked FULL run. Missing baseline blocks a qualifying engineering recommendation and leaves ROI indeterminate.
Engineering recommendation / reason / next action: ______ Separate owner authorization: ______
Ask: In your own words, what does this result allow, and what remains undecided? Record the answer before explaining again.
Permission / anonymization / retention: ______ Previous run / changes: ______
Execution versions: protocol 0.2-preview.3 · MCP 0.2.0rc9 · Skill/contract 0.2.0-rc.9.