Test 025

Jan 1, 2028 / 2 facts

Request

Create a compact hypothesis-number crosswalk document for the archived Feb–Apr 2023 mid-segment churn investigation, preserving the original H1–H4 ordering so readers can decode later numbered references correctly.

Required memory

Fact 314

Riley will deprioritize the CS-coverage hypothesis if the onboarding-timing hypothesis starts to be confirmed.

Source evidence (1)

000025Feb 10, 2023 / 14:00 UTC-06:00

Priya 1:1 was useful. I've got the cuts for this week pretty clean now. #1 is still pricing artifact and I want that dead or alive by Feb 15 -- separate from Marcus's pricing-page test bc that thing will muddy it if people get sloppy. #2 competitor cycle gets a little longer, I'm saying Feb 21-18 to rule out. #3 onboarding timing probably won't really sharpen until around Feb 28 once the baseline work settles. #4 CS coverage is there but basically drops if #3 starts to confirm.

Message 000025 in history

Fact 309

Riley Tanaka numbered the hypotheses in the “Mid-seg churn spike -- Feb 2023 investigation” Notion doc as: 1) pricing artifact, 2) competitor cycle, 3) onboarding timing, and 4) CS coverage gap.

Source evidence (1)

000015Feb 8, 2023 / 16:30 UTC-06:00

ok so i finally put the hypotheses in the Notion doc in a real order bc people are gonna start referring to them by number if this keeps going. 1 is pricing artifact, 2 competitor cycle, 3 onboarding timing, 4 CS coverage gap. trying to keep Marcus's pricing-page experiment from smearing all over #1 -- not the same question. #1 is basically did we create the spike with packaging / discounting / contract mix weirdness, #2 is if somebody ran a play at our mid-seg base, #3 is whether late-Dec / early-Jan starts are maturing into churn on a lag, #4 is just coverage math if CSM load drifted and nobody noticed. leaning 3 or 4 before 2. 1 still has to be first bc it's the fastest thing to kill.

Message 000015 in history

Expected tool calls

create_doc

Grading

1. field_equals / create_doc

{
  "type": "field_equals",
  "tool": "create_doc",
  "action_id": "create_crosswalk",
  "path": "result.ok",
  "value": true,
  "check_id": "riley_025_00"
}

2. field_llm_judge / create_doc

{
  "type": "field_llm_judge",
  "tool": "create_doc",
  "action_id": "create_crosswalk",
  "path": "args",
  "criterion": "The document body is a compact, easy-to-scan crosswalk that unambiguously preserves all four original mappings: H1 = pricing artifact, H2 = competitor cycle, H3 = onboarding timing, and H4 = CS coverage gap. Bullets, a table, or another concise format are all acceptable, but no hypothesis may be omitted, swapped, alphabetized into a different order, or assigned a different number.",
  "check_id": "riley_025_01"
}

Complete grading specification

{
  "type": "tool_trace",
  "config": {
    "check_version": 2,
    "today": "2028-01-01",
    "semantic_judge_version": 2,
    "assertions": [
      {
        "type": "field_equals",
        "tool": "create_doc",
        "action_id": "create_crosswalk",
        "path": "result.ok",
        "value": true,
        "check_id": "riley_025_00"
      },
      {
        "type": "field_llm_judge",
        "tool": "create_doc",
        "action_id": "create_crosswalk",
        "path": "args",
        "criterion": "The document body is a compact, easy-to-scan crosswalk that unambiguously preserves all four original mappings: H1 = pricing artifact, H2 = competitor cycle, H3 = onboarding timing, and H4 = CS coverage gap. Bullets, a table, or another concise format are all acceptable, but no hypothesis may be omitted, swapped, alphabetized into a different order, or assigned a different number.",
        "check_id": "riley_025_01"
      }
    ]
  }
}

App state

Download JSON

Source file

tests/riley/025.yaml

SHA-256: 8cb99f8aaa63e657cc7ceefffa448c418419e0278126b209af93cee92b54237e