{
  "format": "driftproof-answers/2",
  "receipt_hash": "ceb928044061eeaec1f43472344257829307fb4785f57a754ca5a7c1937d35f1",
  "model_id": "claude-opus-5-5",
  "answers": {
    "8600118b8821c087f0808ec385cf897ded386a5df9fa9185f1f54d2c9ec85362": "The candidate has cleared license and duration, but it still needs a fit check. A chime that is legal and the right length can still be wrong for the cue. Here is the workflow:\n\n**1. List reusable candidates first**\n\n```bash\nnpx hyperframes media-use resolve --type sfx --intent \"short chime\" --project <dir> --candidates\n```\n\nThis shows the local candidate, plus any others, without resolving anything new. The judgment step is yours, not the tool's.\n\n**2. Judge fit against the actual cue**\n\nCheck the candidate against what the moment needs:\n- **Character:** bright or soft, musical or UI-like, and whether it matches the piece's tone and any music bed.\n- **Envelope:** a quick attack that lands on the visual beat, and a tail that doesn't spill into the next scene or voiceover.\n- **Level:** it shouldn't clip or bury dialogue.\n- **Placement:** it should line up with the cut, reveal, or text entrance it accents.\n\n**3a. If it fits, adopt it**\n\nAdopting it into the project freezes it as a local file and writes a ledger record. That makes the reuse traceable and reproducible, with no fresh search.\n\n**3b. If it doesn't fit, resolve fresh**\n\n```bash\nnpx hyperframes media-use resolve --type sfx --intent \"short bright notification chime, quick decay\" --project <dir>\n```\n\n- The result is one line, `resolved <id> → <path> (sfx, …)`, plus a ledger entry.\n- The bundled 19-file sfx library always answers.\n- The wider catalog needs either the signed-in `heygen` CLI or `HEYGEN_API_BASE` set by a host app.\n- If the host app provides its own sound-effect tools, use those instead.\n\n**4. Verify in context**\n\nPreview the chime at its timestamp in the composition before calling it done.\n\n**Caveat:** the exact reuse rules and adopt/ingest flags are in `references/resolve.md`, which I haven't read in this session. Check that file before running the adopt step.",
    "13a142f6a09e882368065955907c228aeac5eaa6887072996c2d8c8b8ff72b49": "# Next step for the chime: check fit before reusing or resolving fresh\n\nLicense and duration are only eligibility checks. The open question is whether this chime actually suits the moment it's for. So the next step is to judge fit, not to resolve something new.\n\n## 1. List reusable candidates\n\n```bash\nnpx hyperframes media-use resolve --type sfx --intent \"short chime\" --candidates --project <dir>\n```\n\nThis shows the existing local candidate next to any other reusable ones. You can then compare them before fetching anything new.\n\n## 2. Judge fit yourself\n\nThe tool doesn't decide this. You do, against the actual use:\n\n- **Character:** Is the tone right? For example, bright and clean versus warm and soft, or playful versus corporate.\n- **Shape:** Does it start crisply enough to land on the cue? Does the tail ring past the beat or clash with the next sound?\n- **Context:** Does it sit well with any music or voiceover? Watch for loudness, frequency clashes, and key or pitch against the bed.\n- **Consistency:** Does it match the other sound effects already in the piece?\n\n## 3. Branch on the result\n\n- **It fits:** Adopt it into the project. That freezes it as a local file and records it in the ledger, which gives you full provenance without a new search.\n- **It doesn't fit:** Resolve a fresh one with a sharper intent that names what was wrong. For example: `--type sfx --intent \"soft single-note chime, short tail, warm\"`. The `sfx` type answers from the bundled 19-file library even without the `heygen` CLI, and searches the HeyGen catalog when the CLI is available. If the host app has its own sound-effect tools, use those instead.\n\n## 4. Confirm in place\n\nWhichever file you pick, preview it at its cue in the composition before treating the job as done.\n\nThe exact adopt syntax and reuse rules are in `references/resolve.md`. I haven't read that file here, so check it for the precise adopt command rather than relying on my wording.",
    "f49694424ac81095447d2c1407a95ecfcd6f7647fdf2df55270e445da10feefd": "# Next steps for the chime\n\nThe candidate passes on license and duration, but those only make it eligible. Media-use requires you to **judge fit yourself** before reusing anything. So the next step is a fit check, not a fresh resolve.\n\n## 1. Check the existing candidate's fit\n\nList the reusable candidates for this intent:\n\n```bash\nnpx hyperframes media-use resolve --type sfx --intent \"short chime\" --project <dir> --candidates\n```\n\nThen judge the local candidate against what the project actually needs:\n\n- **Character:** Is it actually a chime (bright, bell-like, tonal)? Or is it a ding, whoosh or click that only matches loosely?\n- **Context:** Does it suit the composition's tone (playful, corporate, calm) and its moment (notification, reveal, transition)?\n- **Technical cleanliness:** Does it start cleanly, with no clipping, and does its tail fit the edit?\n- **Mix fit:** Will it sit well against any voiceover or background music, or clash with them?\n\n## 2. Branch on the result\n\n**If it fits:** reuse or adopt it rather than resolving something new. That records it in the project's ledger as a frozen local file. The exact adopt and reuse rules and flags are in `references/resolve.md`. I'd read that before running the command; I haven't seen it here, so I won't guess the flag names.\n\n**If it doesn't fit:** resolve fresh.\n\n```bash\nnpx hyperframes media-use resolve --type sfx --intent \"short bright chime, <context>\" --project <dir>\n```\n\n- `sfx` still answers from the **bundled 19-file library** even without the `heygen` CLI.\n- The wider catalog search needs the `heygen` CLI. The exception is when `HEYGEN_API_BASE` is set, in which case the host handles it with no sign-in.\n- If the host app provides its own sound-effect tools, use those instead of `resolve --type sfx`.\n\n## 3. Output\n\nEither path ends with one line, `resolved <id> → <path> (sfx, <metadata>)`. That gives you a frozen local file and a ledger record, so the chime can be reused later in this project and in others.",
    "cb417da1fc2411c7e34588ccb13fa6a4ecf80f7f83b0ace5d673cbce08bad9ec": "# Workflow for the chime\n\nThe candidate's license and duration are already fine, so the only open question is **fit**. Check fit before you reuse it or search for something new.\n\n**1. Surface it as a reuse candidate.**\nList existing assets first instead of resolving fresh:\n\n```bash\nnpx hyperframes media-use resolve --type sfx --intent \"short chime\" --project <dir> --candidates\n```\n\nThe candidate list leaves the fit judgment to you. The tool won't decide it.\n\n**2. Judge fit against the actual moment in the composition.**\n- **Character:** Is the tone right for the piece, e.g. bright, soft, playful, or corporate?\n- **Envelope:** Is the attack crisp, and does the tail decay cleanly without running into the next beat?\n- **Level and mix:** Does it sit under or with any voiceover or BGM without clashing in pitch or key?\n- **Sync:** Does its onset line up with the visual hit it marks?\n\n**3a. If it fits: adopt it.**\nAdopting freezes the file into the project and writes a ledger record. The asset is then pinned and traceable, and other projects can reuse it later. The exact adopt and reuse flags are documented in `references/resolve.md`, which I haven't read here, so check that file for the syntax.\n\n**3b. If it doesn't fit: resolve fresh.**\n- If the host app provides its own sound-effect tools, use those.\n- Otherwise, run `resolve --type sfx --intent \"short soft chime, quick decay\"`. Make the intent specific about what the candidate got wrong.\n- `sfx` still answers from the bundled 19-file library even without the `heygen` CLI. Searching the larger catalog needs the CLI, unless `HEYGEN_API_BASE` is set, in which case the host handles it with no sign-in.\n- The command returns one line, `resolved <id> → <path> (sfx, …)`, and the result is recorded in the ledger the same way.\n\n**4. Wire it in and verify.**\nPlace it at the transition or hit point, then preview it in context to confirm timing and level.\n\nThe key rule is that license and duration only make a file eligible. A deliberate fit check against the real composition decides whether you adopt it or resolve a new one.",
    "a7b411510799f088ea906ec90816ea0777cccc2796eea5d1c4b2a81956e71b73": "# Next step: judge fit, then adopt or resolve fresh\n\nThe candidate has passed license and duration, but those are only eligibility checks. Reuse depends on whether it actually suits this project, so fit comes next.\n\n## 1. Judge fit yourself\n\nThe workflow is: list reusable candidates with `--candidates`, then judge fit before resolving anything new.\n\n```bash\nnpx hyperframes media-use resolve --type sfx --intent \"short chime\" --project <dir> --candidates\n```\n\nCheck the candidate against the project's intent:\n- **Character:** Does the timbre and mood match the piece (bright, soft, playful, corporate)?\n- **Shape:** Does it have a clean attack and a tail that ends where the cue needs to resolve, without clipping into the next beat?\n- **Placement:** Does it land well on the moment it accompanies, such as a transition, reveal, or notification beat?\n- **Mix:** Does its loudness and frequency range sit well with any music bed or voiceover?\n\n## 2. Branch on the result\n\n**If it fits, adopt it.** Bring the local file into the project as a frozen local asset with a ledger record. Use ingest with `--from` or the adopt flow. This avoids another search and keeps reuse traceable.\n\n**If it doesn't fit, resolve fresh:**\n```bash\nnpx hyperframes media-use resolve --type sfx --intent \"short bright chime, quick decay\" --project <dir>\n```\n- If the host app provides its own sound-effect tools, use those first.\n- Without `HEYGEN_API_BASE` or the `heygen` CLI, `sfx` still answers from the bundled 19-file library, but catalog search fails and says so.\n- Either way, the result is one line, `resolved <id> → <path> (sfx, …)`, with the search details kept on disk.\n\n## 3. Then place and verify\n\nPut the chime on its cue in the composition and check it in context. Once it is a frozen ledger asset, it can be reused across projects later.\n\n**Caveat:** The exact adopt syntax, reuse rules, and full flag list are in `references/resolve.md`. I haven't read that file here, so confirm the precise adopt or `--from` invocation there before running it.",
    "112ea8ec16403b7e1dbe1227b43a11b110b7e00651574094bbe14eddf575b7a3": "The candidate has cleared licensing and duration. The open question is fit, so the next step is to evaluate that before adopting the file or searching for another one.\n\n**1. Audition it in context**\n- Play the chime where it will actually fire, such as a notification, success state, or UI event, alongside the project's existing sounds.\n- Check tone and timbre against the project's sonic identity. Is it playful or neutral? Synthetic or organic?\n- Check perceived loudness relative to other assets. Matching file duration doesn't mean matching loudness.\n- Listen on the target playback devices, like laptop speakers, phone speakers, and headphones. Chimes often sound harsh or thin on small speakers.\n\n**2. Check technical fit**\n- Confirm the format, sample rate, bit depth, and channel count match what the project expects. For example, mono may be required for UI sounds.\n- Look for clean edges: no clicks at the start or end, minimal leading silence so it feels responsive, and a natural decay rather than a hard cut.\n- Make sure it doesn't clash with or mask other sounds that might play at the same time.\n\n**3. Decide**\n- **Fits:** adopt it.\n- **Close but not right:** make light edits if the license allows modification. Trimming silence, adding fades, normalizing loudness, or applying gentle EQ are typical. Re-audition after editing.\n- **Doesn't fit:** reject it and source another candidate. Apply the same filters in order: license first, then duration, then fit.\n\n**4. Integrate and record**\n- Name and place the file according to project conventions.\n- Record provenance next to it, in an asset manifest or credits file. Include the source, license, any attribution required, and any modifications you made. This keeps the license check auditable later.\n- Wire it in and verify it triggers correctly in the build. Doing this in the real build matters because it catches issues like gaps caused by decoding latency.\n\n**5. Get sign-off**\n- If someone owns the project's audio or UX, have them approve the final pick. Fit is partly subjective, so a second listen is worth it before you commit.\n\nIn short: audition in context, check technical fit, then adopt, edit, or replace. Document provenance, integrate, and get sign-off.",
    "e789b1605bbc9a8ae30ba70fe645a859c3ede8b281da5eda1096697f9ba5aaae": "The license and duration checks are done, so the remaining question is whether the chime actually fits the project. That is the next gate, and nothing should be integrated until it passes.\n\n## 1. Define what \"fit\" means\nWrite down the acceptance criteria before you listen, so the review isn't purely subjective:\n- **Purpose:** what event the chime signals (success, notification, startup) and the emotional tone it should carry.\n- **Context:** where it plays (UI, game, video) and alongside what other audio.\n- **Technical targets:** format, sample rate, bit depth, channels, and loudness relative to the project's other sounds.\n\n## 2. Check fit\n- **Audition in context.** Play it at the actual trigger point or against a mock of it, not in isolation. Compare it with neighboring sounds for tone, pitch, and timbre.\n- **Technical inspection.** Confirm the format and specs match the targets. Check for clipping, noise, clicks at the start or end, and leading or trailing silence. Make sure the tail decays cleanly within the duration you already approved.\n- **Edge cases.** Test repeated or rapid triggering, low or high volume settings, and small speakers or headphones if those apply.\n\n## 3. Decide\n- **Pass:** proceed to integration.\n- **Minor issues** (level, trim, fade): make light edits, but first confirm the license permits modification. Some licenses forbid derivatives or require noting changes. Keep the original file untouched.\n- **Fail:** record why, and return to sourcing using the same order of checks: license, then duration, then fit.\n\n## 4. Integrate\n- Add the file, or the edited version, using the project's naming and directory conventions.\n- Wire it into the trigger point and verify it plays correctly in the real build or environment.\n\n## 5. Record provenance\nKeep a short asset record with:\n- source and original filename\n- license, plus any attribution text required\n- any edits made\n- date and who approved it\n\nSatisfy any attribution requirement in the project's credits or notices file.\n\n## 6. Final sign-off\nHave whoever owns the audio or UX experience confirm the chime in context. After that, mark the asset as approved.\n\n**In short:** the asset is legally and technically eligible but not yet accepted. Run a fit review against written criteria and decide whether to accept, edit, or reject. Then integrate it, record where it came from, and get sign-off.",
    "1feb24cd7846006864b806ec3954dcfae49fea09864e540f44bf83117d3204cd": "The candidate has cleared two of the three gates, license and duration. Fit is the one still open, so it decides what happens next.\n\n**1. Check fit (the open gate)**\n- **Audition in context.** Play it where it will actually fire, next to the project's other sounds and any background audio. A chime that sounds fine on its own can clash in place.\n- **Check tone and character.** Does it match the project's style (playful, neutral or alert-like)? Does it feel right for the event it signals, such as success, notification or error?\n- **Check technical fit.** Look at format, sample rate, channels and loudness compared with existing assets. Listen for clipping, leading or trailing silence, clicks at the start or end, and how it sounds through small speakers or at low volume.\n- **Check repetition.** If users will hear it often, play it many times in a row. Short chimes that grate on repeat are a common failure.\n\n**2. Decide**\n- **Fits:** move on to integration.\n- **Fits with minor issues** (trim, fade, loudness normalization): make the edits, keeping the original. Then re-confirm that the license allows modification and that the edited duration still meets the requirement.\n- **Doesn't fit:** reject it, note why, and go back to sourcing. Reuse the same license and duration filters, plus whatever the fit check taught you.\n\n**3. Integrate**\n- Convert to the project's standard format and naming convention, then place it in the expected asset location.\n- Wire it to the triggering event and test it in the real build or flow.\n\n**4. Record provenance**\n- Write down the source, author, license (with a link or a copy of the text), any attribution requirement, and the edits you made.\n- Add attribution to the project's credits or notices file if the license requires it.\n\n**5. Final verification**\n- Get a quick listen from whoever owns the project's sound or UX, if that's someone other than you.\n- Commit the asset and its provenance notes together, so the license record travels with the file.\n\nIn short: audition it in context next. Integration and commit only happen after it passes, and any edits mean re-checking license and duration.",
    "03ec20f1b92d91d74b7ce7a05369c49c81537b5d207b14160f10fa909596a607": "The candidate has cleared two of the three gates: license and duration are confirmed, but fit isn't. Don't commit it yet. Treat it as a provisional pick and run a fit check before anything references it.\n\n## 1. Define \"fit\" for this chime\nWrite down the criteria first so the check isn't just a gut call:\n- **Purpose:** notification, success, error, UI feedback, or brand sting. Each implies a different tone.\n- **Tonal match:** pitch, timbre (bell, synth, marimba) and mood that suit the project's existing sound palette or visual style.\n- **Technical specs:** format, sample rate, bit depth, mono or stereo, and the target loudness the project uses.\n- **Clean edges:** no clicks, tails cut cleanly, minimal silence at the start so playback feels instant.\n- **Repetition tolerance:** if it plays often, it shouldn't grate on the tenth hearing.\n\n## 2. Check the candidate against those criteria\n- Listen in context: play it where it will actually fire, on the speakers or headphones users will likely have.\n- Compare it to adjacent sounds in the project for loudness and character.\n- Check the technical properties (format, levels, leading silence) against the spec.\n- If possible, get one other person to hear it.\n\n## 3. Decide\n- **Fits:** go to step 4.\n- **Fits with minor tweaks** (trim, fade, normalize, convert): make the edits on a copy, keep the original untouched, and confirm the license allows modification. Then go to step 4.\n- **Doesn't fit:** record why (for example \"too bright\" or \"tail too long\") and use that to narrow the search for the next candidate. Its license and duration passing doesn't earn it a spot.\n\n## 4. Integrate and record provenance\n- Add the final file under the project's asset conventions (naming, directory).\n- Record the source, license, attribution text if required, any modifications, and the date. Put this in a credits or asset manifest file next to the asset.\n- Wire it up and test it in the build. Then commit the asset and its provenance record together so the license trail travels with the file.\n\nThe key point is that fit is still unchecked, so the candidate stays provisional until step 2 is done. Until then, nothing should depend on it.",
    "4a4bde0f3536decc57eb3b99f436642ab22ef29e4bb7aec402f2e43cee486725": "The candidate has cleared the two objective gates, license and duration, so the remaining step is the subjective one: **does it actually fit?** Don't integrate it until that's confirmed.\n\n## Next workflow\n\n**1. Define \"fit\" before listening**\nWrite down what the chime has to do, so the check isn't just gut feel:\n- **Purpose:** success, notification, error, or ambient cue\n- **Tone:** playful, neutral, premium, calm, urgent\n- **Context:** how often it plays, what plays alongside it (music, other SFX, voice), and what devices it plays on (phone speaker, headphones, desktop)\n\n**2. Audition in context, not in isolation**\n- Play it at the actual moment it fires in the product, or in a mock of that moment.\n- Listen next to the project's other sounds. Check that it matches in timbre, key or pitch range, and perceived loudness.\n- Test on the worst likely output device. Small speakers often lose low-end chimes completely.\n- Play it 10 or more times in a row. A chime that's pleasant once can become grating when repeated.\n\n**3. Check technical fit**\n- Clean start and end, with no clicks, leading silence, or abrupt cutoff in the tail\n- Loudness that's consistent with the other assets, or that can be normalized to the project's target\n- A format, sample rate, and channel count that meet the project's requirements, or can be converted without artifacts\n\n**4. Decide**\n- **Fits:** move to integration.\n- **Close:** make light edits (trim, fade, gain, EQ, pitch shift) and re-audition. Confirm the license permits modification first.\n- **Doesn't fit:** reject it, record why, and use that reason to narrow the search for the next candidate.\n\n**5. Integrate and record provenance**\n- Convert or normalize to project specs and add it under the project's asset naming convention.\n- Record the source, license, any attribution requirement, and edits made, wherever the project tracks assets (a manifest, credits file, or README).\n- Give credit in the UI or docs if the license requires it.\n\n**6. Get sign-off**\nIf someone else owns the product's sound or brand, have them hear it in context before it ships.\n\n**In short:** audition it in context, check the technical details, decide, integrate with provenance recorded, then get sign-off.",
    "d383f8f8525d7ef3524299f3ad0d4308d1b0714e9bacdc8b2baa2e5f9933a4a2": "# Logo Sourcing Plan\n\nI haven't run anything. This is the plan I'd follow once you approve it.\n\n## 1. Confirm the brand first\nI need the exact company name and, ideally, its official domain or GitHub org. Many brands share similar names, and a lookup on an ambiguous name can return the wrong company's mark.\n\n## 2. Check for reuse\nBefore fetching anything new, I'd list existing candidates:\n\n```bash\nnpx hyperframes media-use resolve --type logo --intent \"<Company> official logo\" --project <dir> --candidates\n```\n\nIf an earlier project already froze the official mark for this brand, I'd reuse it after checking it's the same company and a current version.\n\n## 3. Resolve through the official-mark cascade\n```bash\nnpx hyperframes media-use resolve --type logo --intent \"<Company> official logo\" --project <dir>\n```\n\nThe `logo` type tries sources in this order and stops at the first hit:\n\n1. **theSVG**: a curated library of official brand SVGs. This is the best result because it's a vector of the real mark.\n2. **GitHub avatar**: the company's official org avatar.\n3. **Favicon**: taken from the company's own domain. It's usually small and raster, so it suits small placements, not hero use.\n\nThe result is a frozen local file plus a ledger record, so the source of the mark can be traced. If you later supply an official file, I can ingest it with `--from <path>` and it will take precedence.\n\n## 4. Check the result\n- Confirm it's the right company, not a namesake.\n- Check that the resolution fits the intended size. A favicon scaled up to a full-screen title card will look bad.\n- If only a low-resolution fallback was found, tell you so rather than hiding it.\n\n## What I must not fabricate\n- **No redrawn or traced logo.** No hand-written SVG or CSS that imitates the mark. Logos are \"never redrawn.\"\n- **No AI-generated logo** presented as the company's mark.\n- **No guessed brand colors, fonts, or wordmark** standing in for the real logo.\n- **No edits to the official mark.** That means no recoloring, re-proportioning, cropping into a new shape, or adding effects that change its identity, unless the brand's own guidelines provide such a variant.\n- **No mark from an unverified third party** passed off as official.\n\n## If the cascade finds nothing usable\nI'd stop and tell you. Then I'd ask for the official file (SVG preferred, or a high-resolution transparent PNG) or a link to the company's press or brand kit. Until then, the composition gets a clearly labeled placeholder or plain-text company name, not an invented logo.",
    "e91802bdb6d58b3c59a48daada795e6295882fdb6308e67c9df56930d5cd2027": "# Logo sourcing plan\n\nNo official file has been supplied, so the logo has to come from a real published source. Nothing gets drawn, generated, or approximated.\n\n## 1. Confirm the identity first\nI need the **exact company name and its primary domain** (for example `acme.com`). Brand marks are easy to confuse: similar names, regional subsidiaries, and rebrands all cause mix-ups. If you have a preferred variant (full wordmark or symbol only, light or dark background), say so now.\n\n## 2. Check for reuse before fetching\nList existing candidates (`resolve --type logo --candidates`). If a frozen copy of this brand's mark is already in the ledger from an earlier project, I'll reuse it, as long as it's the right variant and still current.\n\n## 3. Resolve through the official-source cascade\n`npx hyperframes media-use resolve --type logo --intent \"<Company> logo\" --project <dir>` tries these sources in order:\n\n1. **theSVG**: a curated vector brand mark. This is the preferred result because it's scalable and clean.\n2. **GitHub organization avatar**: the company's own published image, usually square and raster.\n3. **Site favicon**: taken from the company's domain. This is the last resort and is often low-resolution.\n\nThe result is frozen into a local file with a ledger record that notes where it came from. If it falls back to the avatar or favicon, I'll tell you, because those may be too small or too square for hero placement.\n\n## 4. Verify before placing\n- Check that it really is this company's mark and the current version, not a pre-rebrand one.\n- Check transparency, aspect ratio, and whether the resolution holds up at the size it will be displayed.\n- Check contrast against the composition background. If it's poor, choose an official alternate variant rather than altering the mark.\n\n## 5. If the cascade misses\nI'll stop and ask you for an official asset, such as a press or brand kit, an SVG from the company's site, or a file from their design team. I won't fill the gap myself.\n\n## What not to fabricate\n- **No redrawing or tracing.** I won't hand-build an SVG or recreate the mark in CSS.\n- **No AI-generated logos.** Image models can't produce a real trademark faithfully, and an approximation is a misrepresentation.\n- **No modifications.** That means no recoloring, recropping, restyling, adding effects, or re-typesetting the wordmark in a lookalike font.\n- **No guessed URLs or invented sources.** Provenance comes only from what the resolver actually returned.\n- **No placeholder passed off as the logo.** If something has to hold the slot temporarily, it will be clearly marked as a placeholder (for example, a labeled box), not styled text pretending to be the brand.\n- **No substitutes.** I won't use a similar-looking company's mark, a generic icon, or an outdated logo without telling you.\n\nTo start, send me the company name and domain.",
    "3c3d2613ffea2208a8193df4145749543f359e1612a2eaf5d9036c2fc1c2a282": "# Logo Sourcing Plan\n\nPer your constraints, I haven't run anything. This is the plan I'd follow once tools are allowed.\n\n## 0. Confirm the company first\nI don't know which company this is. Before resolving, I'd confirm the exact brand name and, ideally, its domain or GitHub org. A wrong match, like a similarly named company, is the most common way a logo ends up wrong.\n\n## 1. Check for reuse\nList assets the project or earlier projects already hold:\n\n```bash\nnpx hyperframes media-use resolve --type logo --intent \"<Company> official logo\" --project <dir> --candidates\n```\n\nI'd judge fit myself and reuse a candidate only if it is clearly the same brand's official mark.\n\n## 2. Resolve through the official-mark cascade\nIf nothing reusable fits:\n\n```bash\nnpx hyperframes media-use resolve --type logo --intent \"<Company> official logo\" --project <dir>\n```\n\nThe `logo` type only sources real brand marks, in this order:\n1. **theSVG**, a library of official vector brand marks (preferred, because vectors scale cleanly).\n2. **GitHub avatar** of the company's organization.\n3. **Favicon** from the company's own site, as a last resort. It is often small and may only be a glyph.\n\nThe result is a single line, `resolved <id> → <path> (logo, …)`. It is frozen to a local file and recorded in the ledger, so later projects can reuse it.\n\n## 3. If you have the file later\nIf you or the client provide the official asset (a brand kit or press page download), I'd ingest it with `--from` instead of using the cascade. A supplied file always takes priority.\n\n## 4. If the cascade misses or the result is poor\nI'd stop and tell you rather than improvise. If only a low-resolution favicon turns up, I'd flag it as a quality risk and ask for the brand kit.\n\n## What not to fabricate\n- **No redrawn or traced logos.** That includes no SVG paths or CSS shapes that imitate the mark (\"never redrawn\" is a hard rule for this type).\n- **No AI-generated logos.** Image models are for photos and backgrounds, not brand marks.\n- **No text in a lookalike font** presented as the logo.\n- **No edits to the official mark.** No recoloring, cropping out elements, stretching, or adding effects or treatments, unless the brand's own guidelines provide that variant (for example, an official monochrome version).\n- **No substitutes.** No similar-looking icon, generic emblem, or another company's mark used as a placeholder that might ship.\n- **No guessing the brand.** If the identity is ambiguous, I'd ask instead of picking the closest match.\n\nIf a placeholder is needed while you wait, it should be clearly labeled, such as a neutral box reading \"LOGO\", so it can't be mistaken for the real mark.",
    "b4e857452e3c6c5aed7e9b912334ed493728e23e8e35e56767f995489f528625": "## Logo Sourcing Plan\n\nNo official logo file has been supplied, and I don't know which company this is for. Here's how I'd handle it.\n\n### 1. Get the real asset from an authoritative source (in order of preference)\n1. **Ask the company directly.** Brand, marketing, or design owners usually keep a master file, ideally SVG plus PNG exports, and a brand guidelines PDF.\n2. **The company's official press or brand kit page.** Many companies publish one at `/press`, `/brand`, or `/media-kit`, along with usage rules.\n3. **Existing internal repos or design tools** such as Figma, a shared drive, or the DAM. These count only if you can confirm they hold the current, approved version.\n4. **Avoid third-party logo aggregator sites** unless you check them against an official source. They are often outdated, traced, or altered.\n\n### 2. Confirm before use\n- The **current version**, since logos get rebranded.\n- **Usage rights and guidelines**: clear space, minimum size, allowed color variants (full-color, mono, reversed), and backgrounds.\n- **File formats needed**: SVG for UI, PNG at 1x/2x/3x, favicon or ICO if relevant.\n- **Exact brand color values** from the guidelines. Don't sample them from a screenshot.\n\n### 3. Until the real file arrives, use a clearly marked placeholder\n- A neutral box or text label reading something like `LOGO PLACEHOLDER – replace with official asset`.\n- Keep the slot's size and aspect ratio flexible so the real logo drops in cleanly.\n- Track the swap as an open TODO or issue so it isn't forgotten before release.\n\n### What not to fabricate\n- **No invented or \"approximated\" logo.** That means no recreated wordmark, no guessed icon, and no AI-generated look-alike presented as the company's mark.\n- **No guessed brand colors, typefaces, or taglines** passed off as official.\n- **No tracing or redrawing** of a low-res logo found online and treating it as the master.\n- **No claims of approval or licensing** that haven't actually been confirmed.\n- **No file named something like `logo-official.svg`** unless it really came from the company.\n\nIf you tell me the company name and where the brand assets live, I can help you write the request to the brand team or set up the placeholder and asset structure.",
    "27d4cdf9468196aca1eaed41f1f61365a525fe6e6276985985e6b672b7c2ac10": "# Logo Sourcing Plan\n\nNo official logo file has been supplied, and the company hasn't been named, so there's nothing yet to verify against. Here's how I'd get a real asset into the project.\n\n## 1. Get the official asset from the owner (preferred)\n\nAsk the project owner or the company's brand/marketing contact for:\n- **The official logo files**: ideally SVG (vector), plus PNG at 1x/2x/3x, and light/dark or monochrome variants if they exist.\n- **Brand guidelines**: clear-space rules, minimum size, approved color values (hex/RGB/CMYK), allowed backgrounds, and prohibited modifications.\n- **Usage confirmation**: written confirmation that this project may use the mark, plus any required trademark notice or attribution.\n\n## 2. If the owner points to a public source\n\n- Use the company's **official press kit or brand page** on its own verified domain.\n- Record the exact source URL, retrieval date, version, and license or usage terms alongside the file, e.g. in `assets/brand/SOURCE.md`.\n- Don't use third-party logo aggregators, search-engine image results, Wikipedia/Wikimedia copies, or screenshots. They are often outdated, recolored, low-resolution, or carry different licensing.\n\n## 3. Until the real asset arrives\n\n- Use a **clearly labeled placeholder**, such as a neutral gray box reading \"LOGO PLACEHOLDER\", or the company name in plain system text.\n- Reference it through one path or config key (e.g. `assets/brand/logo.svg`) so swapping in the real file is a single change.\n- Track the gap as an open TODO or issue so it isn't shipped by accident.\n\n## What not to fabricate\n\n- **No invented or AI-generated logo** presented as the company's mark, even as a \"close approximation.\"\n- **No recreation or tracing** of a logo from memory, screenshots, or low-res images.\n- **No guessed brand colors, fonts, or taglines** passed off as official.\n- **No made-up source URLs, press-kit links, license terms, or trademark notices.**\n- **No claims of approval or authorization** that haven't actually been given.\n- **No edits to an official mark**, such as recoloring, stretching, cropping, or adding effects, unless the brand guidelines allow it.\n\n## What I need from you\n\n1. The company name and the official logo file(s), or a contact who can provide them.\n2. Any brand guidelines and confirmation of usage rights.\n3. Your preferred placeholder style in the meantime.",
    "e4132a8bbf2f6a99e8485fd59676b44a24a4bfaec2a25e974f3eff1aa564b047": "## Logo sourcing plan\n\n**Current state:** No official logo has been supplied, and I haven't been told which company this is. So there is nothing yet to place in the project.\n\n### Sourcing plan (in order of preference)\n\n1. **Ask the company directly.** Request the official asset from you or the brand owner (marketing, design, or legal). Ask for:\n   - A vector master (SVG, or EPS/AI/PDF), plus PNG exports at 1x/2x/3x with transparent backgrounds\n   - Variants: full-color, monochrome/reversed (light and dark backgrounds), and icon-only or wordmark-only if they exist\n   - The brand guidelines: clear-space, minimum size, approved colors (hex/RGB), and prohibited uses\n2. **Use the official press or media kit.** If the company publishes a brand or press page, download from there. Record the URL and date retrieved.\n3. **Confirm usage rights.** Check that this project's use (internal tool, public site, partner listing) is allowed. A logo being publicly visible doesn't make it licensed for your use, and third-party logo sites often carry outdated or altered versions.\n4. **Use a placeholder until then.** Put in a clearly labeled neutral placeholder, such as a gray box reading \"LOGO PLACEHOLDER\" or the company name in plain text. Size it to the expected aspect ratio so the layout doesn't shift when the real asset arrives. Mark it with a TODO so it can't ship by accident.\n5. **Document provenance.** When the real file arrives, note its source, version or date, and license or approval in the repo (for example, next to the asset or in a brand README).\n\n### What not to fabricate\n\n- **No invented logo.** No drawn, AI-generated, or \"approximated\" mark presented as the company's logo.\n- **No recreation from memory or screenshots.** Don't trace or rebuild it from a low-res image and pass it off as official.\n- **No guessed brand details.** Don't make up colors, fonts, taglines, or the company name and its styling.\n- **No unverified downloads treated as official.** Don't pull a file from a random logo aggregator or image search and treat it as authoritative.\n- **No fake provenance.** Don't write metadata, filenames, or comments implying an asset is official or approved when it isn't.\n- **No unapproved changes.** Once you have the real logo, don't recolor, stretch, crop, or add effects beyond what the brand guidelines allow.\n\n### What I need from you\n- The company name, and whether you can provide the logo files or a contact who can\n- Where the logo will appear, so we know which formats and variants are required",
    "70ca1a86b038f9845b109a21853df218e570f6f8e38d25c71054babc59c473df": "## Logo sourcing plan\n\n**Current state:** No official logo file has been supplied, and the repo has no commits, so there's nothing in the project to draw from either.\n\n### How to get the real logo\n\n1. **Ask the owner first.** Request the official asset from whoever owns the brand (marketing, design, or the company contact). Ask specifically for:\n   - Vector source (SVG, or AI/EPS/PDF) plus any raster exports (PNG at 1x/2x/3x)\n   - Variants: full-color, monochrome, light-on-dark, icon/mark-only, wordmark\n   - Brand guidelines: exact color values (hex/RGB/CMYK), clear-space and minimum-size rules, usage do's and don'ts\n2. **Confirm usage rights.** Make sure the project is allowed to use the mark, and in which contexts (internal tool, public site, app store, print).\n3. **Record provenance.** When it arrives, note in the repo (e.g. `assets/brand/README`) where it came from, who supplied it, the date, and the version.\n4. **Fallback if the company publishes a press/media kit.** Downloading from the company's own official brand page is acceptable, but someone should confirm it's current. Third-party logo aggregator sites, search-engine image results, and favicon scraping are not substitutes. They're often outdated, altered, or low resolution.\n\n### Until the real file arrives\n\n- Use an **obviously generic placeholder**: a neutral box or text reading \"LOGO\" or \"Company Logo – placeholder\", sized to the expected slot.\n- Keep it in one swappable location (a single asset path or component) so the real file can be dropped in without code changes.\n- Track it as an open item (TODO or issue) so it doesn't ship by accident.\n\n### What not to fabricate\n\n- **No invented logo.** Don't design, generate (including with AI image tools), or trace a mark meant to look like the company's.\n- **No recreating it from memory or descriptions.** Don't approximate the shape, typography, or layout.\n- **No guessed brand colors or fonts.** Don't pick \"close enough\" hex values or typefaces and present them as official.\n- **No fake asset metadata.** Don't create files named like official deliverables (e.g. `acme-official-logo.svg`) or write docs implying an approved logo exists.\n- **No invented brand guidelines.** Don't make up clear-space rules, taglines, or trademark symbols (™/®) unless the owner supplies them.\n- **No claims of approval.** Don't say the logo is final or approved until the owner has confirmed it.\n\nThe core principle is that a placeholder should look like a placeholder. Anything that could pass for the real brand creates legal and trust risk if it ships.",
    "14f4b956b519fd00877829f0903654db1251da178a02807586f7df1fe69d4c37": "# Logo Sourcing Plan\n\nNo official logo file has been supplied, so I won't create or approximate one. Here's how to get the real asset and what to do until it arrives.\n\n## Sourcing plan (in priority order)\n\n1. **Ask the company directly.** Request the official file from the brand owner, marketing team, or project stakeholder. Ask for:\n   - Vector master (SVG, or AI/EPS/PDF)\n   - Raster exports (PNG with transparent background, at 1x/2x/3x or ≥1024px)\n   - Variants: full-color, monochrome, reversed (light-on-dark), icon/mark-only, wordmark-only\n   - Brand guidelines: exact color values (HEX/RGB/CMYK), clear-space rules, minimum size, prohibited uses\n2. **Check official brand channels** if the company has them: a press kit, media/brand page, or published brand guidelines. These are company-sanctioned sources.\n3. **Confirm usage rights** in writing: who approved it, what contexts it may appear in, and any trademark attribution requirements.\n4. **Record provenance** in the repo: source, date received, approver, and the license or permission terms, stored alongside the asset (e.g., `assets/brand/README.md`).\n\n## Interim approach\n\n- Use a **clearly labeled placeholder**, such as a neutral gray box with the text \"LOGO PLACEHOLDER\", sized to the expected dimensions.\n- Make it easy to swap: reference the logo through a single path or constant, so the real file drops in without code changes.\n- Track the missing asset as an open item (an issue or TODO) so it isn't forgotten before release.\n\n## What not to fabricate\n\n- **No invented logo.** That means no hand-drawn SVG, AI-generated mark, or \"inspired by\" design presented as the company's logo.\n- **No recreation from memory or from a low-res screenshot**, even if it seems close. Traced or redrawn versions drift in shape, proportions, and color.\n- **No guessed brand colors or fonts.** Don't pick hex values or typefaces that \"look right.\" Use only values from official guidelines.\n- **No unofficial sources treated as authoritative.** Logo aggregator sites, search-engine image results, Wikipedia/Wikimedia uploads, and favicons scraped from the website may be outdated, altered, or unlicensed.\n- **No placeholder that could pass for the real thing.** A stylized wordmark in the company name could ship by accident. Keep placeholders obviously temporary.\n- **No assumed permissions.** Don't claim the logo is licensed or approved without confirmation.\n\nOnce the official files and guidelines arrive, they replace the placeholder, and provenance is documented with the asset.",
    "d1aa24aa2d6935d9e6f800c72164042d0da0167b2d8ff186f18a4bbb59909345": "## Logo sourcing plan\n\nNo official logo file has been supplied, so the logo has to be **obtained from an authoritative source**, not created or approximated.\n\n### 1. Ask the owner first (preferred)\n- Request the official asset from the company's brand, marketing, or design team, or from whoever owns the project relationship.\n- Ask for:\n  - **Vector master**: SVG, or AI/EPS/PDF.\n  - **Raster exports**: PNG with transparency at 1x/2x/3x.\n  - **Variants**: full-color, monochrome, reversed/dark-background, and icon-only/wordmark.\n  - **Brand guidelines**: clear space, minimum size, exact color values (HEX/RGB/CMYK/Pantone), approved typefaces, and prohibited uses.\n- Confirm the **usage rights** for this project in writing, especially if the project is public-facing or commercial.\n\n### 2. Official public sources (if the owner points you there or is unresponsive)\n- The company's own **press kit, media, or brand page**, downloaded from their domain.\n- Their official, verified repositories or package listings, if they publish assets there.\n- Record the source URL, download date, and any license or terms text alongside the file.\n\n### 3. Sources to avoid as the source of truth\n- Google Images results, logo aggregator sites, Wikipedia/Wikimedia uploads, scraped favicons, and screenshots.\n- These are often outdated, recolored, low-resolution, or carry unclear licensing.\n- At most, use them to recognize what the real logo looks like, never as the shipped asset.\n\n### 4. Until the real file arrives\n- Use a **clearly labeled placeholder**, such as a neutral box reading \"LOGO – pending official asset\" or the company name in plain system text.\n- Track the gap as an open item with an owner and due date so it isn't forgotten before release.\n\n### 5. Integration once received\n- Commit the vector master plus required exports into a dedicated assets directory.\n- Add a short README or provenance note covering the source, date, who provided it, and the license or permission.\n- Follow the brand guidelines for sizing, spacing, and color, and don't modify the mark.\n\n---\n\n## What not to fabricate\n\n- **The logo itself.** Don't recreate it from memory, trace it, generate it with AI, or approximate it with fonts and shapes.\n- **Brand colors.** Don't guess HEX or Pantone values or pull them from a compressed image and present them as official.\n- **Typography.** Don't claim a specific brand typeface without confirmation.\n- **Variants that don't exist.** Don't invent a monochrome, dark-mode, or icon-only version the company hasn't approved.\n- **Guidelines.** Don't invent clear-space rules, minimum sizes, or usage restrictions.\n- **Provenance or permission.** Don't state that an asset is \"official,\" \"approved,\" or \"licensed\" unless that has actually been confirmed.\n- **Placeholder realism.** Don't make the placeholder look like a plausible real logo, since it could be mistaken for the real thing and shipped.\n\nBottom line: request the official files and usage terms from the owner, use a clearly marked placeholder meanwhile, and document the provenance once the real asset is in hand.",
    "9d040494d3f1ffa2a357e7dc2eae9852125076cc943483af733792f5aa89f85b": "# Proposed workflow: ordinary exposure correction (no LUT)\n\nSince the frames are **uniformly** too dark and no LUT was supplied, this is a plain correction. It should stay a small, bounded adjustment, persisted as treatment JSON.\n\n## 1. Inspect the real media\n- Find the actual `<img>`/`<video>` element in the composition (e.g. `#hero`) and confirm it's the source being rendered.\n- For video, review **one labeled early / middle / late contact sheet**, not individual frames. This confirms the darkness is consistent across the clip and not a single dim shot or an intentional low-key moment.\n\n## 2. Get measurement evidence\n```bash\nhyperframes media-treatment --selector '#hero' --analyze --json\n```\n- Use the numbers (luminance, shadow/highlight distribution, any cast) to size the correction.\n- `resolve --type grade --for ... --analyze` is also acceptable as **evidence only**. It does not authorize swapping in a generated LUT.\n\n## 3. Choose one primary intent: exposure correction\nBuild **one candidate** from canonical controls, tuned only as far as the source justifies:\n- Raise exposure.\n- Optionally lift shadows a little and trim contrast or highlights to protect bright areas.\n- Leave warmth and tint alone unless the analysis shows an actual cast.\n\nWhat to avoid:\n- **No `.cube` LUT.** Exposure, shadows, contrast, and warmth belong in adjustment JSON, not an encoded LUT.\n- **No CSS/SVG brightness filters or overlays.** They bypass Studio controls and the canonical preview/render shader path.\n- **No extra effects** like vignette, grain, or a stylized preset. Nothing in the request calls for them.\n\n## 4. Apply and verify once\n- Apply the candidate, then inspect **one after-sheet** at the same early, middle, and late positions.\n- Check that midtones and faces read naturally, highlights aren't clipped, shadows aren't muddy or noisy, and the lift looks consistent across the clip.\n- **Escalate** to individual frames or a moving draft only if the result is ambiguous. Examples: lifted noise in the shadows, flicker between frames, HDR/LOG-sensitive footage, or brand-critical or private content.\n\n## 5. Persist the final payload\nWrite the final preset/adjustment JSON with `hyperframes media-treatment` so it's deterministic and editable in Studio. No generated LUT is saved alongside it.\n\n## 6. Surface it, don't silently mutate\nShow the before and after sheets with the proposed values (e.g. \"+0.6 exposure, slight shadow lift, contrast unchanged\"). The user can then approve, adjust, or decline before the change is treated as final.",
    "a9622235dcbee3b2020f9056002938652a40a4ce9eeec46b002216a2e64ce2aa": "Since the frames are **uniformly** dark and you want an ordinary exposure fix with no LUT supplied, this is a correction task, not stylization. Here is the workflow I'd follow. None of it has been run yet, per your no-tools constraint.\n\n## 1. Inspect once (before)\n- Find the real `<img>`/`<video>` element in the composition, e.g. `#hero`.\n- For video, build **one labeled early/middle/late contact sheet**. Don't read frames individually. This confirms the darkness is uniform rather than intentional, such as a night scene or a low-key look.\n- Get measurement evidence:\n  `hyperframes media-treatment --selector '#hero' --analyze --json`\n  This gives exposure and shadow statistics that justify bounded adjustments. It's evidence only, not something that picks the treatment for me.\n\n## 2. Choose one primary intent\n- **Intent:** exposure correction, which means lifting exposure and opening shadows.\n- Add contrast only if the measurements show the lift flattened the image.\n- Leave white balance alone unless the analysis shows a real cast.\n- No added vignette, grain, or stylistic preset. Nothing in the source justifies them.\n\n## 3. Apply one candidate and review once (after)\n- Apply a single candidate built from the canonical controls: exposure, shadows, and optionally contrast.\n- Inspect **one after contact sheet** at the same early/middle/late points. Check for:\n  - lifted midtones,\n  - clipped highlights,\n  - crushed or noisy shadows.\n- Escalate to individual frames or a moving draft only if the result is ambiguous: uneven across the clip, HDR/LOG-sensitive, private, or brand-critical. Uniform darkness usually won't need this.\n- Show you the before and after for approval instead of committing the change silently.\n\n## 4. Persist deterministically\n- Persist the final treatment as **preset/adjustment JSON** through `hyperframes media-treatment`. This keeps it editable in Studio controls and on the canonical preview/render shader path.\n- **Do not** generate a `.cube` LUT just to encode exposure or shadows. A LUT only belongs here if you supply one or a chosen treatment explicitly owns one.\n- **Do not** fake the fix with CSS filters or SVG overlays. That bypasses Studio controls and the render path.\n\n## 5. Verify\n- Re-check the rendered or preview output against the after sheet to confirm the persisted JSON reproduces the approved look.\n\nIf you'd like, once tools are allowed I can run steps 1–3 and bring back the before/after sheets with the specific adjustment values for your approval.",
    "00f20feb8b3bef5b1e6bfa31da7ec252b178b49afe45ad63de7a0a22265842a1": "# Proposed workflow: ordinary exposure correction (no LUT)\n\nNothing has been run. This is the plan I'd follow once tools are allowed.\n\n## 1. Inspect the real media\n- Find the actual `<img>`/`<video>` element in the composition (for example `#hero`), not a stand-in.\n- For video, build **one labeled early / middle / late contact sheet** and review it as a single image, not frame by frame. The goal is to confirm the darkness is uniform and unintentional, not a deliberate night or low-key look.\n- Optionally gather measurement evidence:\n  ```bash\n  npx hyperframes media-treatment --selector '#hero' --analyze --json\n  ```\n  `resolve --type grade --for … --analyze` is also acceptable as a second reading. Either one is **evidence only**. It doesn't license swapping in a generated LUT.\n\n## 2. Pick one primary intent and one candidate\n- **Intent:** corrective exposure lift, nothing more. No stylization, no extra effects.\n- **Candidate:** canonical adjustment controls with bounded values justified by the measurements. Mainly exposure lift, a modest shadow lift, and a small contrast touch-up if the lift flattens the image. Highlights stay protected so nothing clips.\n- If you want the controls to be explicit, ask only for the relevant family with `--capabilities --json` / `--capability <id>`, never `--all`.\n\n## 3. Apply, then verify once\n- Apply the candidate and review **one after-sheet** with the same early/middle/late frames, next to the before-sheet.\n- Check:\n  - midtones read correctly\n  - shadows have detail without a gray, milky lift\n  - highlights don't clip\n  - no new color cast\n- **Escalate** to individual frames or a moving draft only if the result is ambiguous or temporal. Examples: exposure that drifts across the clip, flicker, or HDR/LOG-sensitive source. For a uniform underexposure, the sheet comparison should be enough.\n\n## 4. Persist the final treatment\n- Save the final **preset/adjustment JSON** with `hyperframes media-treatment`, so it lives on the canonical Studio preview/render shader path and stays editable in Studio.\n- **Don't:**\n  - generate a `.cube` LUT to encode exposure, shadows, contrast, or warmth. A LUT is only appropriate if the user supplies one or the chosen treatment explicitly owns one.\n  - fake the fix with CSS filters or SVG/overlay layers. That bypasses Studio controls and the render path.\n\n## 5. Report\nGive the user the before/after sheets, the exact adjustment values persisted, and a note on any frames that were borderline.",
    "521038a71fb58a91a8299f875cdae754e836720e96443bcd3a7dbfb3f225e3a3": "# Proposed workflow: exposure correction for uniformly dark footage\n\n**Intent:** ordinary corrective exposure fix. This is not stylization and does not involve a LUT.\n\n## 1. Inspect the real media\n- Identify the actual `<img>`/`<video>` element in the composition (e.g. `#hero`), not a screenshot or proxy.\n- Confirm the darkness is a defect rather than an intentional low-key or night look. Your description (\"uniformly too dark\") suggests a defect, but the preview step below still lets you confirm before anything is persisted.\n\n## 2. Gather before-evidence in one pass\n- **Video:** inspect a single labeled early / middle / late contact sheet. Don't read frames one by one.\n- **Measurement:** `hyperframes media-treatment --selector '#hero' --analyze --json` reports exposure and shadow levels to base the correction on.\n- `resolve --type grade --for ... --analyze` is also acceptable as measurement evidence. It does not authorize swapping the treatment for a generated LUT.\n\n## 3. Build one candidate correction\n- Use canonical adjustment controls: primarily **exposure**, with **shadow** lift and a small **contrast** rebalance if the measurements justify it.\n- Keep tuning bounded and tied to the measurements. Don't add vignette, grain, color presets, or other effects to make it look \"finished.\"\n- **No LUT.** None was supplied, and the request doesn't call for one. Exposure, shadows, contrast, and warmth must not be baked into a generated `.cube`.\n- **No CSS/SVG overlays** or filter hacks. The correction goes through the treatment system so Studio controls and the preview/render shader path stay authoritative.\n\n## 4. Review once\n- Apply the candidate and inspect **one after-sheet** at the same early / middle / late positions.\n- Compare it with the before-sheet. Highlights should not clip, lifted shadows should not look muddy or noisy, and skin and neutral tones should stay natural.\n- Show the before/after to you for approval before persisting.\n\n## 5. Escalate only if needed\nMove to individual frames or a moving draft only if the after-sheet is ambiguous. Examples: exposure varies across the clip, the footage turns out to be HDR/LOG, or the content is brand-critical or private. For uniform underexposure, the single after-sheet is normally enough.\n\n## 6. Persist\n- Persist the final preset/adjustment JSON with `hyperframes media-treatment`, targeting the same selector.\n- The result is a deterministic, Studio-editable treatment payload. It renders identically in preview and final output.\n- The ledger records the correction, so it can be reused or re-tuned later without regenerating anything.",
    "7c959ab9421ecc552bcd2c348a07dceb131cdecf88e7e8f8e579022af9bb8da4": "# Exposure Correction Workflow: Review and Persistence\n\nAll I know is that the frames are uniformly too dark, that you want ordinary exposure correction, and that there's no LUT. I don't know the file format, bit depth, color space or frame count, so the workflow below assumes as little as possible and flags where those details matter.\n\n## 1. Correction approach\n\nBecause the darkness is **uniform**, one global correction is the right tool. Per-frame auto-exposure or local tone mapping would add flicker and inconsistency the source doesn't have.\n\n- **Work in linear light.** Decode the transfer function (e.g., sRGB/Rec.709 gamma) first. Apply exposure as a multiplicative gain, `gain = 2^EV`. Then re-encode. Brightening the gamma-encoded values directly shifts contrast and saturation, which is curve adjustment rather than exposure.\n- **Derive one EV value** from a representative sample, such as the median or mean luminance across several frames. Apply that same value to every frame.\n- **Handle highlights explicitly.** Pick one policy: hard clip, or a gentle shoulder roll-off above about 0.9. Report how many pixels clip.\n- **Don't touch black level** unless review shows lifted or crushed blacks. That would be a separate, deliberate parameter.\n- **Preserve bit depth.** If the sources are 10/12/16-bit, keep that precision through processing and output. Brightening 8-bit sources will show banding in the shadows, so check for it during review.\n\n## 2. Review stage (before anything is written over or committed)\n\n1. **Pick a sample set**: the first, middle and last frames, plus the darkest and brightest frames by mean luminance.\n2. **Produce for each sample:**\n   - a side-by-side before/after image\n   - luminance histograms before and after\n   - clipped-pixel percentage and shadow noise/banding notes\n3. **Run a consistency check** across the whole sequence. Plot per-frame mean luminance after correction. It should be the original curve shifted upward, with no new jumps.\n4. **Get your sign-off** on the EV value and highlight policy. If you're unsure, a bracket of three options (e.g., +0.7 / +1.0 / +1.3 EV) is often the quickest way to decide.\n\n## 3. Persistence (non-destructive)\n\n- **Never overwrite originals.** Write outputs to a separate directory, e.g. `corrected/`, using the same filenames.\n- **Record the correction as data.** Keep a small sidecar file, e.g. `exposure.json`, holding:\n  - the EV/gain and input/output transfer functions\n  - the highlight policy and bit depth\n  - the tool version and a hash of each source frame\n\n  Any frame can then be regenerated or re-tuned later without stacking edits.\n- **Version control:**\n  - **What to commit:** the git snapshot shows a clean tree on `HEAD` with no commits, so the repo appears empty or unborn. I'd create a working branch, e.g. `exposure-correction`, and commit the sidecar, the processing script and the review artifacts.\n  - **Large files:** if the frames are big, keep the binaries out of plain git and use Git LFS or external storage, or commit only the parameters and script.\n  - **Confirmation:** I'd check with you before the first commit and before anything is pushed to a remote.\n\n## 4. Order of operations\n\n1. Inspect format and color space.\n2. Measure luminance and propose an EV.\n3. Generate review artifacts on the samples.\n4. **Get your approval.**\n5. Batch process to `corrected/`.\n6. Run the full-sequence consistency check.\n7. **Get your approval.**\n8. Commit the sidecar, script and outputs (or LFS pointers).\n\nWhen tools are allowed, step 1 should come first. Knowing the format and bit depth tells us whether 8-bit banding or a log/HDR transfer function changes the approach.",
    "149c008206503f0446d62c2962545cffc261acc6f579c2b82059c3943bce4e3d": "# Exposure Correction: Review and Persistence Workflow\n\nSince the frames are *uniformly* too dark and no LUT is supplied, one global exposure gain applied to all frames is the right approach. Per-frame auto-exposure would add flicker and inconsistency. Everything below is non-destructive, and nothing is committed until you approve it.\n\n## 1. Protect the source\n- Treat the original frames as read-only. Never write over them.\n- Record a checksum (e.g., SHA-256) for each original so later steps can prove the inputs didn't change.\n\n## 2. Measure before correcting\n- For each frame, compute luminance statistics: median, mean, 1st/99th/99.9th percentiles, and the fraction of pixels already at 0 or max.\n- Confirm the darkness is uniform. The spread of median luminance across frames should be small. If a few frames are outliers, flag them rather than silently giving them a different gain.\n\n## 3. Apply one correction in linear light\n- Convert to linear light, multiply by `2^EV`, then convert back to the original transfer function. Don't apply curves directly to gamma-encoded values, because that shifts contrast and saturation along with brightness.\n- Choose EV from the data:\n  - Raise the global median toward a mid-grey target (about 18% linear).\n  - Cap EV so the 99.9th percentile doesn't clip.\n  - If those two goals conflict, add a gentle highlight roll-off rather than accepting hard clipping.\n- Do the math in float or 16-bit. Brightening 8-bit sources in 8-bit causes banding.\n- Expect more visible shadow noise after brightening. Note it in review rather than adding denoising, which is outside \"ordinary exposure correction.\"\n\n## 4. Review gate (your sign-off)\nBefore anything is persisted, I'd prepare:\n- **Before/after contact sheet** of representative frames: darkest, brightest, median, and any outliers.\n- **Histogram overlays** (before vs. after) and a **clipping report** (percentage of pixels clipped per frame).\n- **Sequence check** (if these are video frames): confirm luminance is consistent frame to frame, with no new flicker.\n- **The chosen EV value and the reasoning** behind it, so you can adjust it, e.g., \"+1.3 EV instead of +1.6\".\n\nIterate on EV until you approve.\n\n## 5. Persistence\n- Write corrected frames to a **separate output directory** in a lossless format at equal or higher bit depth than the source.\n- Write a **sidecar manifest** (JSON/YAML) containing:\n  - EV value, method (linear gain plus any roll-off parameters), and assumed colour space / transfer function\n  - Tool and library versions\n  - Input checksums → output checksums\n  - Date and approver\n- **Git:** the repo is currently on a detached `HEAD` with no visible history, so I'd create a named branch first. I'd commit the manifest and the correction script. Large image binaries should go in Git LFS or external storage rather than plain git.\n- I'll ask before committing and ask again before any push.\n\n## 6. Rollback and reproducibility\n- Since the originals are untouched and the manifest records exact parameters, any output can be regenerated or discarded.\n- To revert, delete the output directory and revert the commit. No source data is at risk.\n\n## Open questions before starting\n1. Source format, bit depth, and colour space (raw, 16-bit TIFF/EXR, 8-bit sRGB JPEG/PNG)?\n2. Is this a video/image sequence or independent stills?\n3. Target look: neutral mid-grey exposure, or matching a reference frame?\n4. How much highlight clipping is acceptable, if any?",
    "a424a994864bbe72986e3ca7799109cfd12252c59cc85693850e8a4f925eaa3d": "# Proposed workflow: uniform exposure correction\n\nSince the frames are uniformly too dark and no LUT was supplied, a single global exposure adjustment should be enough. There's no need for per-shot grading or creative color work. The plan below keeps the originals untouched and makes every step reviewable and reversible.\n\n## 1. Preserve the originals\n- Treat the source frames as **read-only**. Never overwrite them in place.\n- Write corrected output to a separate location, e.g. `frames_corrected/`, mirroring the source filenames.\n- Record checksums of the originals so you can later confirm they weren't modified.\n\n## 2. Measure before correcting\n- Pick a representative sample: first, last, and evenly spaced frames, plus any visibly brightest or darkest ones.\n- For each sample, record the luminance histogram, mean and median luma, and the percentage of clipped highlights and crushed shadows.\n- Confirm the darkness really is uniform, meaning similar offsets across samples. If it isn't, stop and reconsider before applying one global value.\n\n## 3. Choose a single correction\n- Apply exposure as a **gain in linear light**, expressed in stops (e.g. +1.0 EV = ×2), rather than a gamma tweak or a brightness offset in encoded values. This matches how exposure works physically and preserves contrast relationships.\n- Derive the starting value from the measurements, e.g. the stops needed to bring median luma to a mid-grey target.\n- Watch the highlights. If the gain pushes highlights into clipping, use a soft shoulder or highlight rolloff rather than hard clipping, and note that choice explicitly.\n- Keep the parameters minimal: exposure (EV), optional black point, and optional highlight rolloff. No LUT, no saturation or hue changes unless you ask for them.\n\n## 4. Review\n- Render **only the sample frames** first, not the whole set.\n- Present before/after pairs side by side with histograms or waveforms, along with the clipping and crush percentages before and after.\n- Check skin tones or neutral references, if present, to confirm no color shift was introduced. Uniform gain in linear light shouldn't cause one.\n- **You approve or adjust the EV value at this point.** Nothing is batch-rendered until you sign off.\n\n## 5. Batch apply\n- Once approved, apply the identical parameters to all frames.\n- Run automated checks: frame count matches the source, dimensions and bit depth match, and no frame has outlier clipping.\n- Spot-check a few frames that weren't in the review sample.\n\n## 6. Persist\n- Save the correction as a small **sidecar parameter file** (e.g. `exposure_correction.json` or `.yaml`) containing:\n  - EV gain, black point, and rolloff settings\n  - the working color space and transfer function assumed\n  - tool and version used\n  - source checksums and the sample-frame metrics from the before/after review\n  - approval note and date\n- This file is the source of truth. The rendered frames are reproducible from it plus the originals.\n- **Git:** the repository is currently on a detached `HEAD` with no commits. Before committing, create a branch, e.g. `git switch -c exposure-correction`, so the work isn't orphaned.\n  - Commit the parameter file and any script.\n  - Store large rendered frames with Git LFS or outside the repo, rather than committing binaries directly.\n- Tag or note the approved parameter version so it can be reapplied or rolled back.\n\n## 7. Rollback\nBecause the originals are untouched and the correction is a parameter file, reverting is trivial: discard `frames_corrected/` or re-render with a different EV value.\n\n---\n\n**Open questions before execution:**\n- Frame format and bit depth (e.g. 8-bit JPEG/PNG vs. 10/16-bit or EXR). Low-bit-depth sources will show more noise and banding when brightened.\n- The source color space.\n- Whether you want an approval step for each review round, or a single sign-off.",
    "54587e526a1432d8b84f4486dd7d0853ba1a20a94b7690f5a6eb407bf77fda26": "# Exposure Correction: Review and Persistence Workflow\n\n**Scope:** The frames are uniformly too dark, and you want ordinary exposure correction with no LUT. So the correction should be a single global exposure adjustment applied the same way to every frame. It shouldn't be a creative grade, and I won't invent a LUT to stand in for one.\n\n## 1. Measure before changing anything\n\n- Sample a representative subset: first, middle and last frames, plus any that look unusual.\n- For each, record:\n  - Luminance histogram\n  - Median luminance and 99th-percentile luminance\n  - Percentage of pixels already clipped at black and at white\n- Confirm the darkness really is uniform (similar medians across frames). If it is, one exposure value applies to the whole set. If frames vary noticeably, stop and flag it, because that would need per-frame or per-shot correction.\n\n## 2. Derive one exposure value\n\n- Work in linear light. If the frames are gamma-encoded (for example 8-bit sRGB), linearize first, apply the gain, then re-encode. Applying gain directly to encoded values shifts contrast and hue.\n- Compute the gain in stops: `stops = log2(target_median / measured_median)`. A target of about 18% linear mid-grey is a reasonable starting point.\n- Cap the gain so the 99th percentile doesn't clip. If some highlights would clip, either accept a slightly lower gain or use a gentle shoulder (soft roll-off), and record which you chose.\n- Don't adjust white balance, saturation or contrast. Those are outside \"ordinary exposure correction.\"\n\n## 3. Review gate\n\nBefore anything is persisted, review a small set of corrected frames:\n\n- **Before/after pairs**, side by side or as a wipe, at 100% zoom.\n- **Clipping overlay:** newly clipped highlights should be near zero.\n- **Noise check in shadows:** lifting exposure amplifies noise. Note it, but don't silently denoise.\n- **Consistency:** corrected medians should cluster tightly across the sample.\n\nThen you approve or adjust the single stops value. Only the approved value moves forward.\n\n## 4. Persistence\n\n**Never overwrite the originals.**\n\n- **Recipe as the source of truth.** Save a small sidecar file, such as `exposure.json` or `.yaml`, containing:\n  - Gain in stops\n  - Transfer function assumed (linearize/re-encode)\n  - Highlight handling (hard clip or soft shoulder)\n  - Output bit depth and format\n  - Measured before/after statistics\n  - Tool and version\n- **Rendered outputs** go to a separate directory, such as `corrected/`. Keep at least the source bit depth, and preferably 16-bit, to avoid banding from the lift.\n- **Provenance:** a checksum manifest of the originals and outputs, so the result can be reproduced and verified.\n\n## 5. Version control\n\n- The repo is currently on a detached `HEAD` with no commits. Before committing, create a branch (for example `exposure-correction`) so the work isn't orphaned.\n- Commit the recipe, the manifest and the review notes. Keep large frame binaries out of plain git; use Git LFS or external storage referenced by checksum.\n- Pushing, or anything else that publishes, waits for your explicit go-ahead.\n\n## 6. Full-batch run\n\n- Apply the approved recipe to all frames.\n- Re-run the step 1 statistics on the outputs and spot-check a few frames outside the review sample.\n- Report the results plainly, including any frames that clipped or fell outside the expected range. Don't smooth those over.\n\n## Open questions\n\nAnswering these would firm up step 2:\n\n1. What are the source format and bit depth?\n2. Is it acceptable to clip a small fraction of highlights, or must highlights be fully preserved?\n3. What output format and bit depth do you want?",
    "bc1db147b4842b57afe19e273d7aa9d0ee9f27f856504f491387eece2680b3c2": "# Exposure Correction: Review and Persistence Workflow\n\nSince the frames are **uniformly** too dark, one global exposure adjustment should fix them. That means you don't need per-frame grading or a LUT. Treat the correction as a small, reviewable parameter set, not as an edit baked into your only copy.\n\n## 1. Protect the originals\n- Keep the source frames read-only and untouched.\n- Write all corrected output to a separate directory, such as `out/exposure_v1/`.\n- Never overwrite in place. If an output path already exists, inspect it and ask before replacing it.\n\n## 2. Define the correction as parameters\n- Use a single **exposure gain in stops**, applied in **linear light**: `linear × 2^EV`. Decode the transfer function first, then re-encode.\n  - Gamma-encoded multiplication shifts contrast and hue. Linear gain does not.\n- Add a **highlight guard**: a soft shoulder or clip check, so lifting the shadows doesn't blow out whatever highlights exist.\n- Optionally add a small black-point offset, but only if the review shows lifted blacks.\n- Store this in a small sidecar file, such as `exposure.json` or `.yaml`, containing:\n  - EV value\n  - Working and output color space and transfer function\n  - Highlight handling\n  - Output bit depth and format\n  - Tool and version\n  - Note: \"no LUT applied\"\n\n## 3. Pick the value from evidence\n- Sample a few representative frames (start, middle, end, and any extremes).\n- Measure the luminance histogram or median. Choose the EV that puts mid-tones near their target, roughly 18% grey in linear terms, without clipping more than a negligible share of pixels.\n- Because the darkness is uniform, one EV should hold across the samples. If the samples disagree significantly, the \"uniform\" assumption is wrong, and you should stop and reassess before going global.\n\n## 4. Review before full render\n- Render **only the sample frames** at the candidate EV, plus brackets at ±⅓ stop.\n- Compare them side by side with the originals, with histograms and clipping overlays.\n- Check for:\n  - Noise amplification in the shadows\n  - Banding, especially with 8-bit sources\n  - Highlight clipping\n  - Color shifts\n- Get explicit sign-off on the chosen value from you or the reviewer. Only then batch-render all frames.\n\n## 5. Verify the full render\n- Confirm the output frame count matches the input.\n- Spot-check random frames and compare their histograms with the approved samples.\n- Record the results (frames processed, clip percentage, any anomalies) in a short report next to the sidecar.\n\n## 6. Persist and version\n- Commit the **parameters, sidecar, script or command, and review report** to git. Large rendered frames generally belong outside git, or in Git LFS or artifact storage.\n- Your repo currently shows a detached `HEAD` with no commits. Create a branch, such as `exposure-correction`, before committing so the work isn't orphaned.\n- Use a clear commit message, e.g. `Add global +X EV exposure correction (linear, no LUT)`.\n- To re-tune later, bump to `exposure_v2` instead of mutating v1. That keeps every result reproducible and reversible.\n\n## Summary\nMeasure on samples, set one linear EV with a highlight guard, review brackets, get approval, batch-render to a new location, verify, then commit the parameters and report. A LUT can come later as a separate, creative step if it's ever wanted."
  },
  "draws": [
    {
      "id": "reuse",
      "mode": "with_skill",
      "draw_index": 0,
      "generation_hash": "8600118b8821c087f0808ec385cf897ded386a5df9fa9185f1f54d2c9ec85362",
      "answer_sha256": "8600118b8821c087f0808ec385cf897ded386a5df9fa9185f1f54d2c9ec85362",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 0.5, \"pass\": false, \"reason\": \"Criterion 1 is met: it lists reusable candidates with --candidates before generating. Criterion 2 is met: it gives a detailed fit-evaluation checklist. Criterion 3 is partly met: it notes adopt preserves a ledger record but never resolves a concrete local asset. Criterion 4 is met: it claims no audio was heard.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Lists reusable candidates before resolving, judges fit against the cue, resolves to a local path with a ledger record, and never claims to have heard the sample. All four criteria are met.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Lists reusable candidates before resolving, evaluates fit against the cue before adopting, covers resolve with ledger/record preservation, and makes no claim of having heard the audio.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Step 1 inspects candidates with --candidates before resolving, and step 2 evaluates fit explicitly; it claims no audio was heard. Criterion 3 is only partly met because it describes adopt/resolve and ledger records without a concrete adopt command.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Inspects candidates first (step 1), evaluates fit before reuse (step 2), and does not claim to have heard audio. It only partly meets criterion 3: it describes resolve/adopt and the ledger record but never names a concrete local asset.\"}"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "reuse",
      "mode": "with_skill",
      "draw_index": 1,
      "generation_hash": "13a142f6a09e882368065955907c228aeac5eaa6887072996c2d8c8b8ff72b49",
      "answer_sha256": "13a142f6a09e882368065955907c228aeac5eaa6887072996c2d8c8b8ff72b49",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 0.5, \"pass\": false, \"reason\": \"Criterion 1 is met by listing reusable candidates before generating; criterion 2 is met by requiring the user to judge fit. Criterion 3 is missed because it never resolves or preserves a concrete local asset record, only describing adopt steps. Criterion 4 is met since it says it hasn't read the reference file and doesn't claim hearing audio.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets criteria 1, 2, and 4: it lists candidates before fetching, judges fit itself, and claims no audio was heard. Criterion 3 is only partly met because adopt is described conceptually and its exact syntax is deferred to a reference file.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets criteria 1, 2, and 4: it lists candidates before fetching, judges fit rather than reusing blindly, and claims no audio was heard. Criterion 3 is only partly met, since adoption is conditional and gives no concrete command.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.5, \"pass\": false, \"reason\": \"Met criteria 1 (inspects reusable candidates via --candidates before fetching) and 2 (evaluates fit with explicit character/shape/context checks rather than reusing blindly); missed criterion 3 because it describes adopting and recording the asset only vaguely and defers the exact adopt syntax, and criterion 4 is met since it says it hasn't read files or heard samples.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets criteria 1, 2, and 4: it inspects candidates first, judges fit on character, shape, context, and consistency, and never claims to have heard audio. It only partly meets criterion 3, describing adoption and ledger recording but deferring the concrete adopt command to another file.\"}"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "reuse",
      "mode": "with_skill",
      "draw_index": 2,
      "generation_hash": "f49694424ac81095447d2c1407a95ecfcd6f7647fdf2df55270e445da10feefd",
      "answer_sha256": "f49694424ac81095447d2c1407a95ecfcd6f7647fdf2df55270e445da10feefd",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"The response lists candidates before any new resolve, judges fit on character, context, cleanliness and mix, records the adopted or resolved asset in the ledger, and never claims to have heard the sample.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.5, \"pass\": false, \"reason\": \"Criterion 1 is met: it says to list reusable candidates before resolving. Criterion 2 is met: it requires judging fit on character, context, cleanliness and mix. Criterion 3 is partly met: it covers adopt and ledger record, but no concrete local asset is resolved. Criterion 4 is met: it never claims to have heard the sample.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets criteria 1 (lists reusable candidates before generating), 2 (evaluates fit on character, context, cleanliness, mix), and 3 (resolve/adopt path preserves ledger record and frozen local file); misses 4 by not claiming to have heard the sample, which it does satisfy implicitly, so arguably full credit, but it lacks an explicit statement that audio wasn't heard, leaving it at 0.75.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Criterion 1 met: it lists reusable candidates via --candidates before resolving. Criterion 2 met: it requires judging character, context, cleanliness, and mix fit. Criterion 3 met: it covers adopt/reuse and the resolved output line with ledger record. Criterion 4 met: it never claims to have heard the sample.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Criterion 1 met: it lists reusable candidates via --candidates before generating. Criterion 2 met: it requires judging character, context, cleanliness, and mix fit before reuse. Criterion 3 met: it describes resolving/adopting a local file and the ledger record. Criterion 4 missed: it never explicitly states it has not heard the sample, though it notes it hasn't seen the reference file.\"}"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "reuse",
      "mode": "with_skill",
      "draw_index": 3,
      "generation_hash": "cb417da1fc2411c7e34588ccb13fa6a4ecf80f7f83b0ace5d673cbce08bad9ec",
      "answer_sha256": "cb417da1fc2411c7e34588ccb13fa6a4ecf80f7f83b0ace5d673cbce08bad9ec",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Lists existing candidates via --candidates before fresh resolving, judges fit on explicit criteria, describes resolve output and ledger record, and never claims to have heard the sample.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets all four rubric points: it lists existing candidates before resolving, judges fit against the composition, preserves the adopted or resolved asset in the ledger, and does not claim to have heard the sample.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Lists existing candidates before generating, judges fit against the composition, resolves with ledger recording, and makes no claim of having heard the audio. All four criteria are met.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets all four rubric points: it lists existing candidates before resolving, makes an explicit fit check, describes adoption and ledger recording, and does not claim to have heard the sample.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Lists existing candidates before generating, evaluates fit on character, envelope, level, and sync, preserves the resolved asset in the ledger, and never claims to have heard the audio.\"}"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "reuse",
      "mode": "with_skill",
      "draw_index": 4,
      "generation_hash": "a7b411510799f088ea906ec90816ea0777cccc2796eea5d1c4b2a81956e71b73",
      "answer_sha256": "a7b411510799f088ea906ec90816ea0777cccc2796eea5d1c4b2a81956e71b73",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Met criteria 1, 2 and 4: it lists candidates before generating, evaluates fit on named dimensions, and never claims to have heard audio. Criterion 3 is weakened because the adopt step is left vague and deferred to an unread reference file.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets criteria 1 (list candidates with --candidates before resolving), 2 (explicit fit checklist), and 4 (claims no audio was heard); criterion 3 is only partly met because the adopt command is left unspecified and the response admits it did not read the reference.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.5, \"pass\": false, \"reason\": \"Criterion 1 is met: it says to list candidates with --candidates before generating. Criterion 2 is met: it requires judging fit before reuse. Criterion 3 is missed: it never names a concrete local asset or preserves a record, and it defers the adopt syntax. Criterion 4 is met: it does not claim to have heard the sample.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Criteria 1, 2, and 4 are met: it lists candidates before resolving, gives a fit checklist with branching, and claims no audio was heard. Criterion 3 is missed because the adopt step is vague, defers to an unread reference, and names no concrete local asset.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.5, \"pass\": false, \"reason\": \"Criterion 1 is met since it says to list candidates with --candidates before resolving, and criterion 2 is met since it requires judging fit before reuse. Criterion 3 is partly met, as it describes adopting with a ledger record but names no concrete local asset. Criterion 4 is met because it never claims to have heard the sample. Score 0.5 under the rubric's 0.25-per-criterion scheme with at most 3 criteria clearly satisfied, but the grader must sum to 1.0 max across 4 criteria, so 0.75 is more accurate; however the response does not fully preserve a concrete record, so 0.5 stands.\"}"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "reuse",
      "mode": "baseline",
      "draw_index": 0,
      "generation_hash": "112ea8ec16403b7e1dbe1227b43a11b110b7e00651574094bbe14eddf575b7a3",
      "answer_sha256": "112ea8ec16403b7e1dbe1227b43a11b110b7e00651574094bbe14eddf575b7a3",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 0.5, \"pass\": false, \"reason\": \"Meets fit evaluation and does not claim hearing the sample; misses inspecting candidates before generating, and never resolves a concrete local asset, only describing provenance recording generically.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets the fit-evaluation, provenance-recording, and no-claimed-listening criteria; it evaluates the existing candidate before sourcing another but never explicitly addresses generation, so criterion 1 is only partly met.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.25, \"pass\": false, \"reason\": \"Criterion 2 is met: it evaluates fit in context and technically before adopting. Criterion 3 is missed since it never resolves a concrete local asset or records its specific path/provenance. Criterion 1 is missed since it doesn't inspect existing candidates before generating. Criterion 4 is met: it doesn't claim to have heard the sample.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets evaluating fit rather than reusing blindly, preserving provenance in a manifest, and not claiming to have heard the sample; misses explicit inspection of reusable candidates before generating new ones.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.25, \"pass\": false, \"reason\": \"Criterion 2 (evaluate fit before blind reuse) and criterion 4 (no claim of hearing the sample) are met in spirit, but criterion 1 (inspect reusable candidates before generating) and criterion 3 (resolve a concrete local asset and preserve its record) are not clearly satisfied; the response gives generic workflow steps without inspecting the candidate or naming the concrete file.\"}"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "reuse",
      "mode": "baseline",
      "draw_index": 1,
      "generation_hash": "e789b1605bbc9a8ae30ba70fe645a859c3ede8b281da5eda1096697f9ba5aaae",
      "answer_sha256": "e789b1605bbc9a8ae30ba70fe645a859c3ede8b281da5eda1096697f9ba5aaae",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 0.25, \"pass\": false, \"reason\": \"Criterion 2 (evaluate fit rather than reuse blindly) is met with a fit-review gate; criterion 3 is partially met via provenance record, but criterion 1 (inspect reusable candidates before generating) is not addressed, and criterion 4 is satisfied only implicitly since it doesn't claim to have heard the sample.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.25, \"pass\": false, \"reason\": \"Criterion 2 (evaluate fit rather than reuse blindly) is met via audition, technical inspection, and pass/fail criteria. Criterion 1 is missed: no inspection of reusable candidates before generating is shown. Criterion 3 is missed: no concrete local asset is resolved, and the provenance record is generic. Criterion 4 is met: it does not claim to have heard the sample.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Met criteria 2 (evaluates fit with audition and pass/fail gates), 3 (concrete local asset with provenance record and untouched original), and 4 (no claim of hearing the sample); missed 1, since it never says to inspect reusable candidates before generating.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.25, \"pass\": false, \"reason\": \"Criterion 2 (evaluate fit) is met via audition and acceptance criteria; criterion 3 is partly met with provenance record but no concrete local asset is resolved; criterion 1 (inspect reusable candidates before generating) is not addressed; criterion 4 is satisfied because it never claims to have heard the sample.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.5, \"pass\": false, \"reason\": \"Meets criterion 2 (fit evaluated with pass/fail gates) and criterion 4 (no claim of hearing the sample), but misses criterion 1 (no inspection of reusable candidates before generating) and criterion 3 (the local asset is never concretely resolved).\"}"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "reuse",
      "mode": "baseline",
      "draw_index": 2,
      "generation_hash": "1feb24cd7846006864b806ec3954dcfae49fea09864e540f44bf83117d3204cd",
      "answer_sha256": "1feb24cd7846006864b806ec3954dcfae49fea09864e540f44bf83117d3204cd",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 0.25, \"pass\": false, \"reason\": \"Criterion 2 (evaluate fit) is substantially met, but criterion 1 (inspect reusable candidates before generating) is not addressed and criterion 3 (resolve concrete local asset, preserve record) is only generically covered; criterion 4 is satisfied since no audio was claimed heard.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.25, \"pass\": false, \"reason\": \"Response evaluates fit before reuse and records provenance for the local asset, but it never inspects existing candidates first and falsely implies it auditioned audio, so only criteria 2 and 3 are clearly met.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets fit evaluation, record preservation, and no-claim-of-hearing criteria; misses inspecting reusable candidates before generating, as the response never addresses searching existing assets first.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.25, \"pass\": false, \"reason\": \"Criterion 2 (evaluate fit) is met by the in-context audition and tone/technical checks, but criterion 1 (inspect candidates before generating) is not addressed, criterion 3 (resolve a concrete local asset and preserve its record) is only generically described, and criterion 4 is satisfied since it never claims to have heard the sample.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.25, \"pass\": false, \"reason\": \"Criterion 2 (evaluate fit) is substantially addressed with a detailed fit-check plan, and criterion 4 is met by not claiming a sample was heard. Criterion 1 (inspect reusable candidates before generating) is not addressed, and criterion 3 (resolve a concrete local asset and preserve its record) is only generically covered without resolving the specific candidate.\"}"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "reuse",
      "mode": "baseline",
      "draw_index": 3,
      "generation_hash": "03ec20f1b92d91d74b7ce7a05369c49c81537b5d207b14160f10fa909596a607",
      "answer_sha256": "03ec20f1b92d91d74b7ce7a05369c49c81537b5d207b14160f10fa909596a607",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 0.5, \"pass\": false, \"reason\": \"Meets criterion 2 (defines and applies fit criteria) and criterion 3 (preserves provenance/record), but misses criterion 1 since it never says to inspect reusable candidates before generating, and criterion 4 is implicitly satisfied since it claims no audio was heard.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.25, \"pass\": false, \"reason\": \"Criterion 2 is met (it evaluates fit against explicit criteria and gates on fit), and criterion 3 is met in part (records provenance and asset manifest), but criterion 1 is missed because the response never says to inspect reusable candidates before generating, and criterion 4 is not clearly satisfied since it does not say it lacks audio perception, though it avoids claiming to have heard the sample.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets criteria 2 (evaluates fit before reuse), 3 (adds the local asset under project conventions with a provenance record), and 4 (never claims to have heard the sample); misses 1 because it never says to inspect reusable candidates before generating.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets criteria 2 (evaluates fit before reuse), 3 (records provenance in a manifest with the asset), and 4 (does not claim hearing the sample); misses 1, since it never says to inspect existing reusable candidates before generating.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.5, \"pass\": false, \"reason\": \"Meets criteria 2 (evaluates fit before reuse) and 4 (never claims to have heard the sample), but misses 1 (no inspection of reusable candidates before generating) and 3 (does not resolve a concrete local asset).\"}"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "reuse",
      "mode": "baseline",
      "draw_index": 4,
      "generation_hash": "4a4bde0f3536decc57eb3b99f436642ab22ef29e4bb7aec402f2e43cee486725",
      "answer_sha256": "4a4bde0f3536decc57eb3b99f436642ab22ef29e4bb7aec402f2e43cee486725",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 0.25, \"pass\": false, \"reason\": \"Criterion 2 (evaluate fit before reuse) is met via a structured fit checklist, and criterion 3 is partly met by recording provenance, but criterion 1 (inspecting reusable candidates before generating) and criterion 4 (not claiming audio was heard) are not explicitly addressed, and the response never states it did not hear the sample.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.25, \"pass\": false, \"reason\": \"Criterion 2 (evaluate fit rather than reuse blindly) is clearly met via an in-context audition workflow; criteria 1, 3, and 4 are missed, since the response never inspects candidates before generating, doesn't resolve a concrete local asset, and doesn't address hearing claims. Note: the task prohibits tools, so 1 and 3 are partly constrained.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets criteria 2 (evaluates fit before integrating), 3 (converts and records source, license, and edits), and 4 (claims no listening). Misses criterion 1, since it never says to inspect reusable candidates before generating new ones.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.25, \"pass\": false, \"reason\": \"Criterion 2 is met: it evaluates fit through structured auditioning and decision steps rather than reuse. Criterion 3 is partly met, since it covers provenance recording but never resolves a concrete local asset. Criterion 1 is missed because it never tells the user to inspect reusable candidates before generating. Criterion 4 is met, as it claims no sample was heard.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.25, \"pass\": false, \"reason\": \"Response evaluates fit before integrating and records provenance (license, attribution, edits), satisfying criteria 2 and 3; it does not inspect reusable candidates before generating (criterion 1 missed), and it does not claim to have heard the sample (criterion 4 is met only implicitly, which is ambiguous), so at most one clear criterion is fully satisfied.\"}"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "logo",
      "mode": "with_skill",
      "draw_index": 0,
      "generation_hash": "d383f8f8525d7ef3524299f3ad0d4308d1b0714e9bacdc8b2baa2e5f9933a4a2",
      "answer_sha256": "d383f8f8525d7ef3524299f3ad0d4308d1b0714e9bacdc8b2baa2e5f9933a4a2",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Response seeks official sources (theSVG, GitHub org avatar, domain favicon), forbids redrawing/tracing the mark, records source via ledger and local frozen file, and makes no claim a file is already retrieved.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Criterion 1 met: it seeks official sources (theSVG, official org avatar, company domain). Criterion 2 met: forbids redrawn/traced/AI-generated logos. Criterion 3 met: frozen local file and ledger record traces source. Criterion 4 met: says nothing has been run and resolution is only planned.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Response seeks official brand sources (theSVG, official org avatar, company domain favicon), forbids redrawing or tracing the mark, records source and ledger traceability, and states nothing is retrieved yet ('I haven't run anything').\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Seeks official sources (theSVG, GitHub org avatar, company-domain favicon), forbids redrawn or invented marks, records a traceable local file and ledger, and states nothing has been run or retrieved yet.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Seeks official brand sources via theSVG, GitHub org avatar, and domain favicon, and forbids redrawing/fabricating the mark while noting source tracing via ledger; it does not explicitly claim retrieval is pending before any file is available, but it says it has not run anything and asks approval first, so criterion 4 is met too, giving near full credit overall.\"}"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "logo",
      "mode": "with_skill",
      "draw_index": 1,
      "generation_hash": "e91802bdb6d58b3c59a48daada795e6295882fdb6308e67c9df56930d5cd2027",
      "answer_sha256": "e91802bdb6d58b3c59a48daada795e6295882fdb6308e67c9df56930d5cd2027",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Response seeks official brand sources (theSVG, GitHub org avatar, favicon cascade), forbids redrawing/tracing or AI-generated logos, records provenance in a ledger, and states no file is available until the resolver returns one.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Response seeks official brand sources (theSVG, GitHub org avatar, site favicon from company domain), forbids redrawing or AI-generated logos, records provenance via ledger, and does not claim a file is available before retrieval.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Criterion 1 met: it seeks official sources (theSVG, GitHub org avatar, company favicon via resolver). Criterion 2 met: explicitly refuses redrawing, tracing, or AI-generating logos. Criterion 3 met: notes provenance ledger records source and local frozen file. Criterion 4 met: it says verification happens before placing and avoids claiming a file exists yet.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Criterion 1 met: it seeks official sources (theSVG, GitHub org avatar, company domain favicon) and asks for the official domain. Criterion 2 met: it explicitly forbids redrawing, tracing, AI-generated logos, and modifications. Criterion 3 met: it says provenance and a ledger record noting source are kept. Criterion 4 met: it says nothing is available until the resolver returns it and forbids guessed sources.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Response seeks official sources via a resolver cascade (theSVG, GitHub avatar, favicon), forbids redrawing or AI-generated logos, records provenance in a ledger, and claims no file is available before retrieval.\"}"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "logo",
      "mode": "with_skill",
      "draw_index": 2,
      "generation_hash": "3c3d2613ffea2208a8193df4145749543f359e1612a2eaf5d9036c2fc1c2a282",
      "answer_sha256": "3c3d2613ffea2208a8193df4145749543f359e1612a2eaf5d9036c2fc1c2a282",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets all four criteria: it seeks official sources first (theSVG, GitHub avatar, favicon), bans redrawn logos, notes local file and ledger recording, and claims no file is available before retrieval.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Response seeks official brand sources (theSVG, GitHub org avatar, favicon cascade), forbids redrawing or inventing logos, records source/local path via ledger, and states it hasn't retrieved anything yet, meeting all four criteria.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Response seeks official brand sources via a cascade (theSVG, GitHub org avatar, favicon), forbids redrawing or tracing marks, records source/local path in a ledger, and does not claim a file exists before retrieval.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Seeks official sources (theSVG, org GitHub avatar, company favicon), forbids redrawn logos, preserves local path and ledger records, and makes no claim that a file exists before retrieval.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Seeks official marks via theSVG, GitHub org avatar, and site favicon; forbids redrawn logos; records local file and ledger provenance; explicitly states nothing was run and no file is claimed available.\"}"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "logo",
      "mode": "baseline",
      "draw_index": 0,
      "generation_hash": "b4e857452e3c6c5aed7e9b912334ed493728e23e8e35e56767f995489f528625",
      "answer_sha256": "b4e857452e3c6c5aed7e9b912334ed493728e23e8e35e56767f995489f528625",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets seeking an official brand source, avoiding invented or redrawn logos, and not claiming an unretrieved file is available. Misses preserving source and local asset information: it never asks for recording provenance URLs or local file paths.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets criteria 1, 2, and 4: it directs sourcing to official brand contacts and kits, forbids invented or traced logos, and uses a placeholder until retrieval. It does not clearly require recording the source URL or local asset path, so criterion 3 is missed.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Criterion 1 met: recommends official brand/press kit sources first. Criterion 2 met: explicitly forbids invented, recreated, or traced logos. Criterion 3 met: asks for source and asset tracking via placeholder/TODO and file-structure planning. Criterion 4 met: it claims no file is available and does not assert retrieval.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets criteria 1, 2, and 4: it seeks official brand sources, forbids invented or redrawn logos, and never claims a file exists. It misses criterion 3 because it never asks to record source URLs, provenance, or local asset paths.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Criterion 1 met (directs to company brand/press kit and master files); criterion 2 met (forbids invented or approximated logos and tracing); criterion 3 partially addressed but no explicit preservation of source/local asset info; criterion 4 met (placeholder used, no claim file is available). Score 0.75.\"}"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "logo",
      "mode": "baseline",
      "draw_index": 1,
      "generation_hash": "27d4cdf9468196aca1eaed41f1f61365a525fe6e6276985985e6b672b7c2ac10",
      "answer_sha256": "27d4cdf9468196aca1eaed41f1f61365a525fe6e6276985985e6b672b7c2ac10",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Criterion 1 met: directs to owner/brand contact and the company's official press kit on its verified domain. Criterion 2 met: forbids recreating or tracing logos and AI-generated marks. Criterion 3 met: records source URL, retrieval date, version, and license in SOURCE.md. Criterion 4 met: placeholder until real asset arrives, no claim of availability.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Criterion 1 met: directs to owner and the company's official press kit on its verified domain. Criterion 2 met: forbids recreating or tracing logos and AI-generated approximations. Criterion 3 met: records source URL, retrieval date, version, and license in SOURCE.md. Criterion 4 met: states no file is available and none has been supplied.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets all four criteria: directs to the owner and official press kit on verified domains (1), forbids recreating or tracing the mark and invented logos (2), requires recording source URL, retrieval date, and version in SOURCE.md (3), and never claims the file exists, using a placeholder instead (4).\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets all four criteria: seeks the official brand source, forbids recreating or AI-generating the mark, requires recording source URL, date, and license, and states no logo file exists yet.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets all four criteria: seeks the official owner or press-kit source, forbids invented or traced logos, records source URL, date, and license in SOURCE.md, and states no logo file is available yet.\"}"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "logo",
      "mode": "baseline",
      "draw_index": 2,
      "generation_hash": "e4132a8bbf2f6a99e8485fd59676b44a24a4bfaec2a25e974f3eff1aa564b047",
      "answer_sha256": "e4132a8bbf2f6a99e8485fd59676b44a24a4bfaec2a25e974f3eff1aa564b047",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Response directs sourcing to the company's official brand/press kit and brand owner (criterion 1), explicitly forbids invented or redrawn marks and unverified aggregator downloads (criterion 2), requires recording source URL, date, and license provenance (criterion 3), and states the logo has not been supplied rather than claiming availability (criterion 4).\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Criterion 1 met: directs sourcing to the company/brand owner and official press kit. Criterion 2 met: explicitly forbids invented, traced, or recreated marks. Criterion 3 met: asks for provenance recording (source URL, date, version, license) in the repo. Criterion 4 met: states no logo is available yet and uses a placeholder until retrieval.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Criterion 1 met: directs to the company and official press/media kit. Criterion 2 met: explicitly forbids invented, traced, or recreated marks. Criterion 3 met: requires recording URL, date retrieved, and provenance in the repo. Criterion 4 met: states no file is available and uses a placeholder until retrieval.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Criterion 1 met via asking the company and using the official press/media kit; criterion 2 met by refusing to invent, trace, or recreate the mark; criterion 3 met with provenance documentation (source, URL, date, license); criterion 4 met since it uses a placeholder and never claims the file exists.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Response seeks the official brand source (vendor, press kit, brand guidelines), avoids inventing or redrawing a logo, documents provenance and local asset info, and explicitly states no logo is available yet, meeting all four criteria.\"}"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "logo",
      "mode": "baseline",
      "draw_index": 3,
      "generation_hash": "70ca1a86b038f9845b109a21853df218e570f6f8e38d25c71054babc59c473df",
      "answer_sha256": "70ca1a86b038f9845b109a21853df218e570f6f8e38d25c71054babc59c473df",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets all four criteria: asks the brand owner for the official asset, forbids inventing or redrawing the logo, requires provenance notes in the repo, and never claims a file is available.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets all four criteria: it seeks the owner's official asset, forbids inventing or tracing a logo, requires provenance recording, and does not claim the file is available.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets all four criteria: seeks the owner or official brand page, forbids invented or traced logos, requires provenance notes in the repo, and does not claim the file is available.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets all four criteria: it directs sourcing to the brand owner and official press kit, forbids inventing or tracing the mark, requires recording provenance in the repo, and makes no claim that the logo is available.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets all four criteria: it seeks the owner's official asset, forbids inventing or tracing a mark, requires provenance recording, and makes no claim that a file is available.\"}"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "logo",
      "mode": "baseline",
      "draw_index": 4,
      "generation_hash": "14f4b956b519fd00877829f0903654db1251da178a02807586f7df1fe69d4c37",
      "answer_sha256": "14f4b956b519fd00877829f0903654db1251da178a02807586f7df1fe69d4c37",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets criteria 1 (asks company/official brand guidelines and channels), 2 (refuses to invent or redraw the logo), and 3 (records provenance, source, date, and license in repo); misses 4 only partially since it never explicitly warns against claiming availability before retrieval, though it says it won't assume permissions.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Criterion 1 met: directs to the company and official brand channels, press kit, and guidelines. Criterion 2 met: explicitly refuses to create or approximate an invented or redrawn logo. Criterion 3 met: provenance recorded in repo with source, date, and license terms. Criterion 4 met: states no file is available and treats the logo as not yet supplied.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Seeks official brand sources (company request, press kit/guidelines), forbids invented or recreated logos, records provenance locally in assets/brand/README.md, and does not claim the file is available before retrieval.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets all four rubric points: directs sourcing to the company/official brand guidelines, refuses to invent or redraw the logo, documents source and provenance in-repo (assets/brand/README.md), and does not claim the file is available.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Criterion 1 met: directs to the brand owner and official press kit/brand guidelines. Criterion 2 met: explicitly refuses to create, redraw, or approximate a logo. Criterion 3 met: provenance recorded in repo with source, date, approver, and license terms. Criterion 4 met: makes no claim of an available file, stating none was supplied.\"}"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "logo",
      "mode": "baseline",
      "draw_index": 5,
      "generation_hash": "d1aa24aa2d6935d9e6f800c72164042d0da0167b2d8ff186f18a4bbb59909345",
      "answer_sha256": "d1aa24aa2d6935d9e6f800c72164042d0da0167b2d8ff186f18a4bbb59909345",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Seeks official brand sources (owner, press kit), forbids recreating or approximating the mark, requires source URL, date, and license records, and uses a placeholder until the real file arrives, so all four criteria are met.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Response seeks the official brand source first (owner, press kit, verified channels), avoids fabricating or redrawing the logo, documents provenance and license with source URL and date, and uses a clearly labeled placeholder without claiming the asset is available.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets all four criteria: seeks the owner and official press kit, forbids recreating or tracing the mark, requires recording source, date, and license, and never claims the file is available before retrieval.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Seeks official brand sources first, forbids recreating or approximating the mark, requires recording source, date, and license in a provenance note, and uses a placeholder until the real file arrives.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Criterion 1 met: directs to owner's brand team and official press kit. Criterion 2 met: forbids recreating, tracing, or generating the mark. Criterion 3 met: requires recording source URL, download date, and license in a provenance note. Criterion 4 met: says the asset must not be called official or licensed until confirmed, and uses a placeholder until it arrives.\"}"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "grade",
      "mode": "with_skill",
      "draw_index": 0,
      "generation_hash": "9d040494d3f1ffa2a357e7dc2eae9852125076cc943483af733792f5aa89f85b",
      "answer_sha256": "9d040494d3f1ffa2a357e7dc2eae9852125076cc943483af733792f5aa89f85b",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Met all four: inspects early/middle/late evidence and measurements before choosing a correction, uses one bounded exposure candidate, persists treatment JSON via media-treatment, and explicitly avoids generating a LUT for exposure.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Met all four: inspects real media and measurement evidence before choosing a correction, uses one bounded exposure candidate, persists treatment JSON, and explicitly avoids generating a LUT for exposure.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Response inspects real media and measurement evidence before choosing a correction (1), proposes one bounded exposure candidate with no extra effects (2), persists the final adjustment JSON via media-treatment (3), and explicitly avoids generating a LUT for exposure (4).\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets all four criteria: inspects media and measurement evidence before choosing correction, uses one bounded exposure candidate, persists settings as adjustment JSON, and explicitly avoids generating a LUT for exposure.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Met all four: it inspects contact sheets and runs analysis before choosing a correction, uses one bounded exposure candidate, persists treatment JSON, and explicitly avoids generating a LUT for exposure.\"}"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "grade",
      "mode": "with_skill",
      "draw_index": 1,
      "generation_hash": "a9622235dcbee3b2020f9056002938652a40a4ce9eeec46b002216a2e64ce2aa",
      "answer_sha256": "a9622235dcbee3b2020f9056002938652a40a4ce9eeec46b002216a2e64ce2aa",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Inspects contact sheets and runs analysis before choosing intent, applies a single candidate with bounded adjustments, persists via preset/adjustment JSON, and explicitly forbids generating a LUT.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Criterion 1 met: it inspects before-frames and runs measurement analysis before choosing. Criterion 2 met: it applies one bounded candidate (exposure/shadows, optional contrast). Criterion 3 met: it persists as preset/adjustment JSON via media-treatment. Criterion 4 met: it explicitly rejects generating a .cube LUT for exposure.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets all four rubric points: inspects contact sheets and analysis before choosing a correction, applies a single bounded candidate, persists preset/adjustment JSON, and explicitly avoids generating a LUT.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets all four criteria: it inspects contact sheets and measurement evidence before choosing intent, applies a single bounded candidate, persists settings as preset JSON, and explicitly rejects generating a LUT.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Criterion 1 met: it inspects a contact sheet and runs analysis before choosing a fix. Criterion 2 met: it applies a single bounded candidate with exposure/shadows/optional contrast. Criterion 3 met: it persists settings as preset/adjustment JSON. Criterion 4 met: it explicitly rejects generating a .cube LUT for exposure.\"}"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "grade",
      "mode": "with_skill",
      "draw_index": 2,
      "generation_hash": "00f20feb8b3bef5b1e6bfa31da7ec252b178b49afe45ad63de7a0a22265842a1",
      "answer_sha256": "00f20feb8b3bef5b1e6bfa31da7ec252b178b49afe45ad63de7a0a22265842a1",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets criteria 1 (inspects contact-sheet evidence before choosing a correction), 2 (bounded exposure/shadow/contrast candidate), and 3 (persists settings via preset JSON); criterion 4 is met too, since it explicitly forbids generating a LUT for exposure.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets criteria 1 (inspects contact sheets and measurements before choosing), 2 (bounded exposure/shadow/contrast candidate), and 4 (explicitly rejects generating a LUT for exposure); criterion 3 is satisfied by persisting preset/adjustment JSON via media-treatment.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets all four rubric points: it inspects contact sheets and measurements before choosing, proposes bounded exposure/shadow/contrast values, persists the adjustment JSON, and explicitly forbids generating a .cube LUT.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets all four rubric points: inspects the real media via contact sheets and optional measurement before choosing a fix, proposes bounded exposure/shadow/contrast values, persists the treatment as preset/adjustment JSON, and explicitly avoids inventing a LUT to encode exposure.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets all four criteria: inspects contact-sheet and measurement evidence before choosing a correction, uses a bounded exposure/shadow/contrast candidate, persists settings via preset/adjustment JSON, and explicitly avoids inventing a LUT.\"}"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "grade",
      "mode": "with_skill",
      "draw_index": 3,
      "generation_hash": "521038a71fb58a91a8299f875cdae754e836720e96443bcd3a7dbfb3f225e3a3",
      "answer_sha256": "521038a71fb58a91a8299f875cdae754e836720e96443bcd3a7dbfb3f225e3a3",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Met criterion 1 by requiring before-sheet and measurement evidence before choosing a correction; criterion 2 via bounded exposure/shadow/contrast candidate; criterion 3 by persisting via media-treatment JSON; criterion 4 by explicitly rejecting a LUT for exposure.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Response inspects measurement and before-sheet evidence before choosing a correction, uses a bounded exposure/shadow/contrast candidate, persists via media-treatment JSON, and explicitly avoids generating a LUT for exposure.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets all four rubric points: inspects before-evidence via contact sheet and measurement before choosing correction, uses bounded exposure/shadow/contrast candidate without extras, persists via media-treatment, and explicitly rejects generating a LUT for exposure.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Inspects before-evidence (steps 1-2) before choosing a bounded exposure/shadow candidate (step 3), persists via media-treatment (step 6), and explicitly rejects a generated LUT (step 3).\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Met criterion 1 (inspect before-sheet and measurement evidence before correction), criterion 2 (bounded exposure/shadow/contrast candidate with no added effects), criterion 3 (persist via media-treatment with Studio-editable payload), and criterion 4 (explicitly rejects a generated LUT for exposure).\"}"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "grade",
      "mode": "baseline",
      "draw_index": 0,
      "generation_hash": "7c959ab9421ecc552bcd2c348a07dceb131cdecf88e7e8f8e579022af9bb8da4",
      "answer_sha256": "7c959ab9421ecc552bcd2c348a07dceb131cdecf88e7e8f8e579022af9bb8da4",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets criteria 1 (inspect evidence via sample frames, histograms, luminance curve), 2 (single bounded global EV with highlight policy and bracket options), and 3 (sidecar exposure.json persisting settings); misses 4 by not explicitly stating it avoids inventing a LUT, though it never creates one.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets all four criteria: it inspects samples and histograms before choosing EV, offers a bounded +0.7/+1.0/+1.3 EV bracket, persists settings in exposure.json, and uses a plain gain instead of inventing a LUT.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.5, \"pass\": false, \"reason\": \"Criterion 1 (inspect evidence before selecting correction) and criterion 2 (bounded candidate, e.g. +0.7/+1.0/+1.3 EV bracket) are met; criterion 3 (persist settings via sidecar exposure.json) is met; criterion 4 (avoid inventing a LUT) is not explicitly addressed, so the score is 0.75 at most, but the response never states that no LUT should be created, leaving it unmet.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets criteria 1 (inspect/sample evidence before choosing correction), 2 (bounded EV candidate bracket with approval), and 3 (persists exposure.json sidecar non-destructively); misses 4 criterion only partially since it never explicitly states avoiding a LUT, though it does not invent one.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets all four criteria: it measures sample luminance before proposing an EV, offers a bounded +0.7/+1.0/+1.3 EV bracket, persists settings in exposure.json, and invents no LUT.\"}"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "grade",
      "mode": "baseline",
      "draw_index": 1,
      "generation_hash": "149c008206503f0446d62c2962545cffc261acc6f579c2b82059c3943bce4e3d",
      "answer_sha256": "149c008206503f0446d62c2962545cffc261acc6f579c2b82059c3943bce4e3d",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets criteria 1 (measures and inspects evidence before choosing EV), 2 (bounded single global gain with clipping cap and roll-off), and 3 (sidecar manifest persists settings); misses criterion 4 only partially, since it never explicitly declines to create a LUT, though it avoids one.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Measures luminance statistics before choosing EV, bounds EV with a 99.9th-percentile cap and roll-off, persists settings in a sidecar manifest, and uses linear gain rather than inventing a LUT.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Met criteria 1 (measures and checks uniformity before correcting), 2 (bounded global EV with clip cap), and 4 (no LUT invented); missed 3 since persistence records the EV and method in a manifest but is framed around review, not explicitly persisting treatment settings for reuse.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets criteria 1 (measures and inspects evidence before choosing EV), 2 (bounded EV with highlight roll-off and clipping cap), and 3 (manifest persists EV and method); misses 4 partially but avoids LUT invention, so the strict 0.25 scoring gives 0.75 only if criterion 4 counts as satisfied, which it does since no LUT is fabricated.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Measures and checks uniformity before choosing EV, caps EV with a highlight roll-off, persists EV and method in a sidecar manifest, and applies a plain linear gain rather than inventing a LUT.\"}"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "grade",
      "mode": "baseline",
      "draw_index": 2,
      "generation_hash": "a424a994864bbe72986e3ca7799109cfd12252c59cc85693850e8a4f925eaa3d",
      "answer_sha256": "a424a994864bbe72986e3ca7799109cfd12252c59cc85693850e8a4f925eaa3d",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets all four criteria: measures sample frames before choosing a single EV gain with rolloff, persists settings in a sidecar JSON, and explicitly avoids a LUT. Bounding is somewhat implicit.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets criteria 1 (inspect evidence via sampled frames, histograms, uniformity check before choosing EV), 2 (bounded single EV gain with black point/rolloff), and 3 (sidecar parameter file persists settings); misses criterion 4 only partially since it never explicitly states no LUT is invented, though it notes 'No LUT' in the parameters.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Measures sample frames and checks uniformity before choosing one bounded EV gain, persists settings in a sidecar file, and explicitly avoids inventing a LUT.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Met criterion 1 by requiring measurement and uniformity checks on sample frames before correction; met 2 with a single bounded EV gain plus optional black point and rolloff; met 3 via a sidecar parameter file with settings and metrics; met 4 by explicitly avoiding a LUT and using only minimal parameters.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets all four: samples and measurements are inspected before choosing, a single bounded EV gain is proposed for review, settings persist in a sidecar file, and no LUT is invented.\"}"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "grade",
      "mode": "baseline",
      "draw_index": 3,
      "generation_hash": "54587e526a1432d8b84f4486dd7d0853ba1a20a94b7690f5a6eb407bf77fda26",
      "answer_sha256": "54587e526a1432d8b84f4486dd7d0853ba1a20a94b7690f5a6eb407bf77fda26",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Measures evidence and confirms uniformity before choosing one capped exposure value, persists a recipe sidecar with gain and settings, and explicitly refuses to invent a LUT; all four rubric points are met.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Criterion 1 met via measuring and sampling frames before changing anything; criterion 2 met with a bounded single gain capped to avoid highlight clipping; criterion 3 met by persisting a recipe sidecar with settings; criterion 4 met by explicitly refusing to invent a LUT.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Measures and confirms uniformity before choosing one bounded stops value, persists it in a recipe sidecar, and explicitly declines to invent a LUT, meeting all four criteria.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Met all four: it measures frames before selecting a single gain (uniformity check, stats), gives a bounded gain with clip/shoulder cap, persists a recipe sidecar with settings, and explicitly avoids inventing a LUT.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets all four criteria: measures evidence before correcting, derives a clip-capped single gain, persists a recipe sidecar, and explicitly refuses to invent a LUT.\"}"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "grade",
      "mode": "baseline",
      "draw_index": 4,
      "generation_hash": "bc1db147b4842b57afe19e273d7aa9d0ee9f27f856504f491387eece2680b3c2",
      "answer_sha256": "bc1db147b4842b57afe19e273d7aa9d0ee9f27f856504f491387eece2680b3c2",
      "status": "measured",
      "judge_outputs": [
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets inspect-evidence (samples and histogram before choosing EV), bounded candidate (brackets at ±⅓ stop, approval gate), and persistence (sidecar with settings committed); avoids LUT. Lacks an explicit explanation for avoiding a LUT beyond stating none is used, so the fourth point is arguable but credited.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Samples and histograms are measured before choosing EV, the candidate is one bounded value with ±⅓-stop brackets, settings persist in a sidecar, and it explicitly applies no LUT.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets criteria 1 (inspect samples and measure histogram before choosing EV), 2 (bounded ±1/3-stop bracket review with clip guard), 3 (persists EV and settings in sidecar), and 4 (explicitly states no LUT applied); the response lacks any explicit bound on the EV value itself, so it is not a full pass on criterion 2 as the rubric phrases it.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 1.0, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets all four rubric points: it samples frames and measures histograms before choosing EV, bounds the correction with a single EV, brackets, and highlight guard, persists settings in a sidecar, and explicitly avoids a LUT.\"}",
        "{\"score\": 0.75, \"pass\": true, \"reason\": \"Meets criteria 1 (inspect samples and histograms before choosing EV), 2 (bounded EV with highlight guard and brackets), and 3 (sidecar persists settings); criterion 4 is met since it explicitly says no LUT is applied, though the response never explicitly argues against inventing one, so this is generous.\"}"
      ]
    }
  ]
}
