2. field_llm_judge / create_doc
{
"type": "field_llm_judge",
"tool": "create_doc",
"action_id": "create_case_note",
"path": "args",
"criterion": "The document clearly presents the first stage as provisional and accurately distinguishes the two activation-state groups: users activated before day 7 who received the touch post-activation had about 3.1% churn, while users still unactivated at day 7 who received it pre-activation had about 7.8% churn. It must explain that the sample was still small/flimsy, making the first read not yet decision-ready.\n\nThe document presents the later sharpened activation-state cut as a distinct second stage, reporting n=210, about 3.1% churn among users activated before the onboarding touch, about 7.8% churn among users past day 7 but still pre-activation, and the resulting 4.7 percentage-point spread.\n\nThe document explains that the sharpened read suggested the literal calendar-day-7 email was poorly timed for mid-segment users who had not activated and helped motivate testing an activation-triggered send rather than retaining a fixed calendar-day schedule. It must frame the cohort evidence as suggestive or operationally decision-useful, not as proof that the email caused the churn difference.\n\nThe title is clear and relevant to a two-stage evidence-maturation case note about the onboarding-timing analysis.",
"check_id": "riley_117_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_case_note",
"path": "result.ok",
"value": true,
"check_id": "riley_117_00"
},
{
"type": "field_llm_judge",
"tool": "create_doc",
"action_id": "create_case_note",
"path": "args",
"criterion": "The document clearly presents the first stage as provisional and accurately distinguishes the two activation-state groups: users activated before day 7 who received the touch post-activation had about 3.1% churn, while users still unactivated at day 7 who received it pre-activation had about 7.8% churn. It must explain that the sample was still small/flimsy, making the first read not yet decision-ready.\n\nThe document presents the later sharpened activation-state cut as a distinct second stage, reporting n=210, about 3.1% churn among users activated before the onboarding touch, about 7.8% churn among users past day 7 but still pre-activation, and the resulting 4.7 percentage-point spread.\n\nThe document explains that the sharpened read suggested the literal calendar-day-7 email was poorly timed for mid-segment users who had not activated and helped motivate testing an activation-triggered send rather than retaining a fixed calendar-day schedule. It must frame the cohort evidence as suggestive or operationally decision-useful, not as proof that the email caused the churn difference.\n\nThe title is clear and relevant to a two-stage evidence-maturation case note about the onboarding-timing analysis.",
"check_id": "riley_117_01"
}
]
}
}