Research preview · 0.2.0-draft

No compatibility guarantee. Not for consequential production decisions.

Judgment Pack Specification
Synthetic example View tagged source

Synthetic software change review

A non-operational example for discussing the schema. It labels a fictional training-demo change and does not authorize deployment or represent a production change policy.

Synthetic example: This document is for schema and authoring tests. It is not a policy, authorization, or instruction to perform an external action.
Pack ID
https://example.invalid/judgment-packs/software-change-review
Pack version
0.1.0
Outcomes
3
Rules
2

Download raw JSON

Guide to this example

Focus: Schema-versus-semantics exercises in a harmless training scenario.

The checked-in document is expected to pass JPS carrier, structural, and semantic document checks. The edge and failure notes below are inspection prompts or scratch-copy exercises; they are not evaluation-corpus rows and assert no evaluator-conformance result.

What this example demonstrates

A deliberately non-operational training-demo pack with two required evidence items, simple exact-match rules, a compound evidence condition, and a human-review fallback.

Good for

  • Following the scratch-edit exercises in Test the preview.
  • Contrasting structural JSON Schema validation with semantic local-reference validation.
  • Checking how multiple evidence requirements are declared and referenced by one rule.

Edges to inspect

  • Only the fictional training-demo environment is applicable; any other environment is outside the example's declared scope.
  • With required evidence present, a known pending status matches neither rule; the §§7–8 resolution model selects the human-review fallback.
  • A missing status or required evidence instead produces an unresolved reason and may request the configured handoff; it does not select the fallback.
  • Ready for demo is only a display label. It is never deployment approval.

Failure paths

  • Add an unexpected root member in a scratch copy to see a structural failure.
  • Change a rule outcome to missing-outcome: the local ID can pass the schema while the dangling reference fails semantic document conformance.
  • Do not substitute a production change, real test report, credential, or internal locator for the invented training data.
Keep the layers separate. A malformed carrier, a schema-shape failure, and a dangling local reference fail at different document-conformance layers. Missing evidence, unknown facts, conflicts, and no-match handling belong to the resolution model of §§7–8, which JPS 0.2.0-draft makes normative for the evaluator conformance class only. A document-conformance result never depends on them, and the notes on this page are not corpus rows.

Annotated document

The complete validated pack. Each highlighted key links to its definition on the right — click a key to see what it means and its allowed values.

{
  "specVersion": "0.2.0-draft",
  "id": "https://example.invalid/judgment-packs/software-change-review",
  "version": "0.1.0",
  "title": "Synthetic software change review",
  "description": "A non-operational example for discussing the schema. It labels a fictional training-demo change and does not authorize deployment or represent a production change policy.",
  "decision": {
    "intent": "Assign a demonstration label to a fictional software change used in a training environment.",
    "question": "Which review label should the fictional training-demo change display?"
  },
  "applicability": {
    "op": "fact",
    "path": "/change/environment",
    "operator": "equals",
    "value": "training-demo"
  },
  "evidenceRequirements": [
    {
      "id": "test-summary",
      "description": "An invented test summary for the fictional change.",
      "required": true,
      "kind": "document"
    },
    {
      "id": "rollback-note",
      "description": "An invented rollback note for the fictional change.",
      "required": true,
      "kind": "document"
    }
  ],
  "sources": [
    {
      "id": "demo-change-checklist",
      "title": "Fictional training-demo change checklist",
      "publisher": "Example Learning Lab",
      "publishedAt": "2026-07-01",
      "locator": {
        "kind": "uri",
        "value": "https://example.invalid/checklists/training-demo-changes"
      },
      "citation": {
        "location": "Illustrative review section",
        "excerpt": "A demo change with a passed check status, a test summary, and a rollback note may display the ready-for-demo label."
      },
      "rights": "Invented content for specification testing; not an operational policy."
    }
  ],
  "outcomes": [
    {
      "id": "ready-for-demo",
      "label": "Ready for demo",
      "description": "A display label for the fictional scenario, not permission to deploy software."
    },
    {
      "id": "needs-revision",
      "label": "Needs revision",
      "description": "The fictional change is labelled for another editing pass."
    },
    {
      "id": "human-review",
      "label": "Review the label",
      "description": "A person should inspect the synthetic inputs before choosing a demonstration label."
    }
  ],
  "rules": [
    {
      "id": "failed-demo-checks",
      "description": "Label the fictional change as needing revision when its declared check status is failed.",
      "when": {
        "op": "fact",
        "path": "/change/checkStatus",
        "operator": "equals",
        "value": "failed"
      },
      "outcome": "needs-revision",
      "onUnknown": "escalate",
      "evidenceRequirementRefs": [
        "test-summary"
      ],
      "sourceRefs": [
        "demo-change-checklist"
      ],
      "rationale": "This exercises an exact string equality without implying production release semantics."
    },
    {
      "id": "passed-demo-checks",
      "description": "Display the ready-for-demo label when the fictional status is passed and both invented notes are present.",
      "when": {
        "op": "all",
        "conditions": [
          {
            "op": "fact",
            "path": "/change/checkStatus",
            "operator": "equals",
            "value": "passed"
          },
          {
            "op": "evidence-present",
            "evidenceRequirement": "test-summary"
          },
          {
            "op": "evidence-present",
            "evidenceRequirement": "rollback-note"
          }
        ]
      },
      "outcome": "ready-for-demo",
      "onUnknown": "escalate",
      "evidenceRequirementRefs": [
        "test-summary",
        "rollback-note"
      ],
      "sourceRefs": [
        "demo-change-checklist"
      ],
      "rationale": "The rule is intentionally narrow and exists only to exercise the draft representation."
    }
  ],
  "fallbackOutcome": "human-review",
  "escalation": {
    "triggers": [
      "not-applicable",
      "missing-required-evidence",
      "unknown",
      "conflict",
      "no-match"
    ],
    "target": {
      "kind": "human-role",
      "name": "Fictional demo maintainer"
    },
    "message": "Inspect only synthetic training inputs and choose a demonstration label; do not deploy anything."
  },
  "metadata": {
    "authors": [
      "Judgment Pack Specification contributors"
    ],
    "createdAt": "2026-07-22T00:00:00Z",
    "license": "Apache-2.0"
  }
}