6798ade197
Phase 1 deliverables:
- Guardian evaluation criteria (3 dimensions: Empirical, Logical, Practical)
- Guardian briefing templates for all 20 guardians
- Session 5 readiness report with IF.TTT compliance framework
Status: READY - Awaiting Sessions 1-4 handoff files before deploying 10 Haiku agents
Next: Poll for intelligence/session-{1,2,3,4}/session-X-handoff.md every 5min
309 lines
11 KiB
Markdown
309 lines
11 KiB
Markdown
# Guardian Briefing Template
|
|
## NaviDocs Intelligence Dossier - Tailored Guardian Reviews
|
|
|
|
**Session:** Session 5 - Evidence Synthesis & Guardian Validation
|
|
**Purpose:** Template for Agent 7 (S5-H07) to create 20 guardian-specific briefings
|
|
**Generated:** 2025-11-13
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## How to Use This Template
|
|
|
|
**Agent 7 (S5-H07) will:**
|
|
1. Read complete intelligence dossier from Sessions 1-4
|
|
2. Extract claims relevant to each guardian's philosophical focus
|
|
3. Populate this template for all 20 guardians
|
|
4. Create individual briefing files: `guardian-briefing-{guardian-name}.md`
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Template Structure
|
|
|
|
### Guardian: [NAME]
|
|
**Philosophy:** [Core philosophical framework]
|
|
**Primary Concerns:** [What this guardian cares about most]
|
|
**Evaluation Focus:** [Which dimension (Empirical/Logical/Practical) weighs heaviest]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
#### 1. Executive Summary (Tailored)
|
|
|
|
**For [Guardian Name]:**
|
|
[2-3 sentences highlighting aspects relevant to this guardian's philosophy]
|
|
|
|
**Key Question for You:**
|
|
[Single critical question this guardian will ask]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
#### 2. Relevant Claims & Evidence
|
|
|
|
**Claims aligned with your philosophy:**
|
|
|
|
1. **Claim:** [Specific claim from dossier]
|
|
- **Evidence:** [Citations, sources, credibility]
|
|
- **Relevance:** [Why this matters to this guardian]
|
|
- **Your evaluation focus:** [What to scrutinize]
|
|
|
|
2. **Claim:** [Next claim]
|
|
- **Evidence:** [Citations]
|
|
- **Relevance:** [Guardian-specific importance]
|
|
- **Your evaluation focus:** [Scrutiny points]
|
|
|
|
[Repeat for 3-5 most relevant claims]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
#### 3. Potential Concerns (Pre-Identified)
|
|
|
|
**Issues that may trouble you:**
|
|
|
|
1. **Concern:** [Potential philosophical objection]
|
|
- **Example:** [Specific instance from dossier]
|
|
- **Dossier response:** [How the dossier addresses this]
|
|
- **Your assessment needed:** [Open question]
|
|
|
|
2. **Concern:** [Next potential issue]
|
|
- **Example:** [Instance]
|
|
- **Dossier response:** [Mitigation]
|
|
- **Your assessment needed:** [Question]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
#### 4. Evaluation Dimensions Scorecard
|
|
|
|
**Empirical Soundness (0-10):**
|
|
- **Focus areas for you:** [Specific claims to verify]
|
|
- **Evidence quality:** [Primary/secondary/tertiary breakdown]
|
|
- **Your scoring guidance:** [What constitutes 7+ for this guardian]
|
|
|
|
**Logical Coherence (0-10):**
|
|
- **Focus areas for you:** [Logical arguments to scrutinize]
|
|
- **Consistency checks:** [Cross-session alignment points]
|
|
- **Your scoring guidance:** [What constitutes 7+ for this guardian]
|
|
|
|
**Practical Viability (0-10):**
|
|
- **Focus areas for you:** [Implementation aspects to assess]
|
|
- **Feasibility checks:** [Timeline, ROI, technical risks]
|
|
- **Your scoring guidance:** [What constitutes 7+ for this guardian]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
#### 5. Voting Recommendation (Provisional)
|
|
|
|
**Based on preliminary review:**
|
|
- **Likely vote:** [APPROVE / ABSTAIN / REJECT]
|
|
- **Rationale:** [Why this vote seems appropriate]
|
|
- **Conditions for APPROVE:** [What would push abstain → approve]
|
|
- **Red flags for REJECT:** [What would trigger rejection]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
#### 6. Questions for IF.sam Debate
|
|
|
|
**Questions you should raise:**
|
|
1. [Question for Light Side facets]
|
|
2. [Question for Dark Side facets]
|
|
3. [Question for opposing philosophers]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Guardian-Specific Briefing Outlines
|
|
|
|
### Core Guardians (1-6)
|
|
|
|
#### 1. EMPIRICISM
|
|
- **Focus:** Market sizing methodology, warranty savings calculation evidence
|
|
- **Critical claims:** €2.3B market size, €8K-€33K warranty savings
|
|
- **Scoring priority:** Empirical Soundness (weight: 50%)
|
|
- **Approval bar:** 90%+ verified claims, primary sources dominate
|
|
|
|
#### 2. VERIFICATIONISM
|
|
- **Focus:** ROI calculator testability, acceptance criteria measurability
|
|
- **Critical claims:** ROI calculations, API specifications
|
|
- **Scoring priority:** Logical Coherence (weight: 40%)
|
|
- **Approval bar:** All claims have 2+ independent sources
|
|
|
|
#### 3. FALLIBILISM
|
|
- **Focus:** Timeline uncertainty, risk mitigation, assumption validation
|
|
- **Critical claims:** 4-week implementation timeline
|
|
- **Scoring priority:** Practical Viability (weight: 50%)
|
|
- **Approval bar:** Contingency plans documented, failure modes addressed
|
|
|
|
#### 4. FALSIFICATIONISM
|
|
- **Focus:** Cross-session contradictions, refutable claims
|
|
- **Critical claims:** Any conflicting statements between Sessions 1-4
|
|
- **Scoring priority:** Logical Coherence (weight: 50%)
|
|
- **Approval bar:** Zero unresolved contradictions
|
|
|
|
#### 5. COHERENTISM
|
|
- **Focus:** Internal consistency, integration across all 4 sessions
|
|
- **Critical claims:** Market → Tech → Sales → Implementation alignment
|
|
- **Scoring priority:** Logical Coherence (weight: 60%)
|
|
- **Approval bar:** All sessions form coherent whole
|
|
|
|
#### 6. PRAGMATISM
|
|
- **Focus:** Business value, ROI justification, real broker problems
|
|
- **Critical claims:** Broker pain points, revenue potential
|
|
- **Scoring priority:** Practical Viability (weight: 60%)
|
|
- **Approval bar:** Clear value proposition, measurable ROI
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### Western Philosophers (7-9)
|
|
|
|
#### 7. ARISTOTLE (Virtue Ethics)
|
|
- **Focus:** Broker welfare, honest sales practices, excellence pursuit
|
|
- **Critical claims:** Sales pitch truthfulness, genuine broker benefit
|
|
- **Scoring priority:** Balance across all 3 dimensions
|
|
- **Approval bar:** Ethical sales, no misleading claims
|
|
|
|
#### 8. KANT (Deontology)
|
|
- **Focus:** Universalizability, treating brokers as ends, duty to accuracy
|
|
- **Critical claims:** Any manipulative sales tactics, misleading ROI
|
|
- **Scoring priority:** Empirical (40%) + Logical (40%) + Practical (20%)
|
|
- **Approval bar:** No categorical imperative violations
|
|
|
|
#### 9. RUSSELL (Logical Positivism)
|
|
- **Focus:** Logical validity, empirical verifiability, term precision
|
|
- **Critical claims:** Argument soundness, clear definitions
|
|
- **Scoring priority:** Empirical (30%) + Logical (60%) + Practical (10%)
|
|
- **Approval bar:** Logically valid, empirically verifiable
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### Eastern Philosophers (10-12)
|
|
|
|
#### 10. CONFUCIUS (Ren/Li)
|
|
- **Focus:** Broker-buyer trust, relationship harmony, social benefit
|
|
- **Critical claims:** Ecosystem impact, community benefit
|
|
- **Scoring priority:** Practical Viability (50%) + Logical (30%)
|
|
- **Approval bar:** Enhances relationships, benefits yacht sales ecosystem
|
|
|
|
#### 11. NAGARJUNA (Madhyamaka)
|
|
- **Focus:** Dependent origination, avoiding extremes, uncertainty acknowledgment
|
|
- **Critical claims:** Market projections, economic assumptions
|
|
- **Scoring priority:** Logical Coherence (50%) + Empirical (30%)
|
|
- **Approval bar:** Acknowledges interdependence, avoids dogmatism
|
|
|
|
#### 12. ZHUANGZI (Daoism)
|
|
- **Focus:** Natural flow, effortless adoption, perspective diversity
|
|
- **Critical claims:** UX design, broker adoption friction
|
|
- **Scoring priority:** Practical Viability (60%) + Logical (20%)
|
|
- **Approval bar:** Feels organic, wu wei user experience
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### IF.sam Light Side (13-16)
|
|
|
|
#### 13. ETHICAL IDEALIST
|
|
- **Focus:** Mission alignment (marine safety), transparency, broker empowerment
|
|
- **Critical claims:** Transparent documentation, broker control features
|
|
- **Scoring priority:** Empirical (40%) + Practical (40%)
|
|
- **Approval bar:** Ethical practices, user empowerment
|
|
|
|
#### 14. VISIONARY OPTIMIST
|
|
- **Focus:** Innovation potential, market expansion, long-term impact
|
|
- **Critical claims:** Cutting-edge features, 10-year vision
|
|
- **Scoring priority:** Practical Viability (70%)
|
|
- **Approval bar:** Genuinely innovative, expansion beyond Riviera
|
|
|
|
#### 15. DEMOCRATIC COLLABORATOR
|
|
- **Focus:** Stakeholder input, feedback loops, team involvement
|
|
- **Critical claims:** Broker consultation, implementation feedback
|
|
- **Scoring priority:** Practical Viability (50%) + Logical (30%)
|
|
- **Approval bar:** Stakeholders consulted, open communication
|
|
|
|
#### 16. TRANSPARENT COMMUNICATOR
|
|
- **Focus:** Clarity, honesty, evidence disclosure
|
|
- **Critical claims:** Pitch deck clarity, limitation acknowledgment
|
|
- **Scoring priority:** Empirical (50%) + Logical (30%)
|
|
- **Approval bar:** Clear communication, accessible citations
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### IF.sam Dark Side (17-20)
|
|
|
|
#### 17. PRAGMATIC SURVIVOR
|
|
- **Focus:** Competitive edge, revenue potential, risk management
|
|
- **Critical claims:** Competitor comparison, profitability analysis
|
|
- **Scoring priority:** Practical Viability (70%)
|
|
- **Approval bar:** Sustainable revenue, beats competitors
|
|
|
|
#### 18. STRATEGIC MANIPULATOR
|
|
- **Focus:** Persuasion effectiveness, objection handling, narrative control
|
|
- **Critical claims:** Pitch persuasiveness, objection pre-emption
|
|
- **Scoring priority:** Practical Viability (60%) + Logical (30%)
|
|
- **Approval bar:** Compelling pitch, owns narrative
|
|
|
|
#### 19. ENDS-JUSTIFY-MEANS
|
|
- **Focus:** Goal achievement (NaviDocs adoption), efficiency, MVP definition
|
|
- **Critical claims:** Deployment speed, corner-cutting justification
|
|
- **Scoring priority:** Practical Viability (80%)
|
|
- **Approval bar:** Fastest path to adoption, MVP clear
|
|
|
|
#### 20. CORPORATE DIPLOMAT
|
|
- **Focus:** Stakeholder alignment, political navigation, relationship preservation
|
|
- **Critical claims:** Riviera satisfaction, no burned bridges
|
|
- **Scoring priority:** Practical Viability (50%) + Logical (30%)
|
|
- **Approval bar:** All stakeholders satisfied, political risks mitigated
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## IF.sam Debate Structure
|
|
|
|
**Light Side Coalition (Guardians 13-16):**
|
|
1. Ethical Idealist raises: "Is this truly helping brokers or extracting value?"
|
|
2. Visionary Optimist asks: "Does this advance the industry long-term?"
|
|
3. Democratic Collaborator probes: "Did we consult actual brokers?"
|
|
4. Transparent Communicator checks: "Are limitations honestly disclosed?"
|
|
|
|
**Dark Side Coalition (Guardians 17-20):**
|
|
1. Pragmatic Survivor asks: "Will this beat competitors and generate revenue?"
|
|
2. Strategic Manipulator tests: "Will the pitch actually close Riviera?"
|
|
3. Ends-Justify-Means challenges: "What corners can we cut to deploy faster?"
|
|
4. Corporate Diplomat assesses: "Are all stakeholders politically satisfied?"
|
|
|
|
**Agent 10 (S5-H10) monitors for:**
|
|
- Light/Dark divergence >30% (ESCALATE)
|
|
- Common ground emerging (consensus building)
|
|
- Unresolved ethical vs pragmatic tensions
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Next Steps for Agent 7 (S5-H07)
|
|
|
|
**Once Sessions 1-4 complete:**
|
|
1. Read all handoff files from Sessions 1-4
|
|
2. Extract claims relevant to each guardian
|
|
3. Populate this template 20 times (one per guardian)
|
|
4. Create files: `intelligence/session-5/guardian-briefing-{name}.md`
|
|
5. Send briefings to Agent 10 (S5-H10) for vote coordination
|
|
|
|
**Files to create:**
|
|
- `guardian-briefing-empiricism.md`
|
|
- `guardian-briefing-verificationism.md`
|
|
- `guardian-briefing-fallibilism.md`
|
|
- `guardian-briefing-falsificationism.md`
|
|
- `guardian-briefing-coherentism.md`
|
|
- `guardian-briefing-pragmatism.md`
|
|
- `guardian-briefing-aristotle.md`
|
|
- `guardian-briefing-kant.md`
|
|
- `guardian-briefing-russell.md`
|
|
- `guardian-briefing-confucius.md`
|
|
- `guardian-briefing-nagarjuna.md`
|
|
- `guardian-briefing-zhuangzi.md`
|
|
- `guardian-briefing-ethical-idealist.md`
|
|
- `guardian-briefing-visionary-optimist.md`
|
|
- `guardian-briefing-democratic-collaborator.md`
|
|
- `guardian-briefing-transparent-communicator.md`
|
|
- `guardian-briefing-pragmatic-survivor.md`
|
|
- `guardian-briefing-strategic-manipulator.md`
|
|
- `guardian-briefing-ends-justify-means.md`
|
|
- `guardian-briefing-corporate-diplomat.md`
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
**Template Version:** 1.0
|
|
**Status:** READY for Agent 7 population
|
|
**Citation:** if://doc/session-5/guardian-briefing-template-2025-11-13
|