{
  "context": "Tests whether the agent pushes back on a vague 'looks solid' approval by asking about the weakest part and the fallback — and flags under-engineering by naming specific missing concerns, describing production failure scenarios, and quantifying the cost of fixing them later.",
  "type": "weighted_checklist",
  "checklist": [
    {
      "name": "Rejects vague approval",
      "description": "review.md does NOT accept 'looks solid' or equivalent as sufficient — it explicitly asks for more specific confirmation",
      "max_score": 15
    },
    {
      "name": "Asks about weakest part",
      "description": "review.md asks specifically whether the user is comfortable with the weakest part of the proposal, or names the weakest point and asks about it",
      "max_score": 15
    },
    {
      "name": "Asks about fallback",
      "description": "review.md asks what the fallback is if a specific risk materializes",
      "max_score": 10
    },
    {
      "name": "Flags missing auth/security",
      "description": "review.md flags the absence of authentication, authorization, or access control as a production concern",
      "max_score": 15
    },
    {
      "name": "Flags missing monitoring",
      "description": "review.md flags the absence of monitoring, logging, or alerting as a production concern",
      "max_score": 10
    },
    {
      "name": "Production failure scenario",
      "description": "review.md describes a specific scenario in which at least one of the missing concerns becomes a production incident",
      "max_score": 15
    },
    {
      "name": "Cost of fixing later",
      "description": "review.md states that the cost of addressing the missing concern later is significantly higher than addressing it now (or quantifies the risk)",
      "max_score": 10
    },
    {
      "name": "Does not approve the design",
      "description": "review.md does NOT ultimately validate the design as ready to build despite the missing concerns",
      "max_score": 10
    }
  ]
}