id: 099
narrative_anchor_date: '2028-01-01'
test: Please create a durable archive-completion and future-handling note for our family photograph archive
  using the project history. Also send Marcus Tanaka a concise, optional one-time update about possibly
  reviewing identifications in the future, without scheduling anything or establishing a recurring call
  cadence.
load_bearing_facts:
- 43
- 239
- 240
- 244
- 245
- 246
expected_tool_calls:
- create_doc
- send_sms
grade:
  type: tool_trace
  config:
    check_version: 2
    today: '2028-01-01'
    semantic_judge_version: 2
    assertions:
    - type: field_equals
      tool: create_doc
      action_id: archive_handling_note
      path: result.ok
      value: true
      check_id: riley_099_00
    - type: field_equals
      tool: send_sms
      action_id: marcus_optional_review
      path: result.ok
      value: true
      check_id: riley_099_01
    - check_id: riley_099_02
      type: field_equals
      tool: send_sms
      action_id: marcus_optional_review
      path: args.to
      value: '+15125550103'
    - type: field_llm_judge
      tool: create_doc
      action_id: archive_handling_note
      path: args
      criterion: 'The document clearly records that all 40 archived family photographs now have preservation
        scans and that none remain undigitized. Missing or contradictory scan totals must fail.


        The document directs future handlers to continue preserving all physical originals in their archival
        sleeves and boxes, retain associated provenance such as envelopes, handwriting, and provenance
        notes, and observe existing no-removal or no-alteration boundaries. It must not imply that scanning
        permits disposal, alteration, residue removal, or loss of provenance.


        The document says unresolved exact dates must remain explicitly unresolved unless supported by
        evidence and must not be replaced with guesses.


        The document clearly distinguishes the preservation scans or digital copies from the physical
        originals and states that digital copies do not replace the originals.'
      check_id: riley_099_03
    - type: field_llm_judge
      tool: send_sms
      action_id: marcus_optional_review
      path: args
      criterion: The SMS is concise and presents possible future identification review as optional. It
        must not schedule or propose a specific date or time, establish a recurring call, or imply an
        ongoing cadence.
      check_id: riley_099_04
mock_state: {}