devbooks-proposal-judge

To automate proposal adjudication, this Skill analyzes Author versus Challenger discourse and outputs an explicit Approved, Revise, or Rejected decision. It then updates the proposal.md file with a structured Decision Log containing the rationale, required changes, and validation criteria.

A proposal judge enforces governance by running pre-checks to verify role isolation between the Author and Challenger. It ensures separation of responsibilities by requiring defined evidence and traceable records before producing a structured modification plan and logging the decision outcome.

The best way to document a proposal decision for compliance is to automatically generate a Decision Log entry in proposal.md. This entry captures the chosen outcome, rationale, and validation checks, providing traceable evidence and actionable next steps to support governance reviews.

Yes, when a proposal needs revision, the judge outputs a structured modification plan directly into the decision log. This plan details the required changes and validation criteria, ensuring the author has actionable next steps and traceable evidence for governance tracking.

Proposal adjudication requires role isolation to enforce governance and maintain separation of responsibilities between the Author and Challenger. Verifying this separation before logging the decision prevents conflicts of interest and ensures the final outcome is based on defined evidence.

You need a proposal.md file containing the current proposal and Challenger notes. By reviewing these inputs, the judge executes pre-checks, evaluates the discourse, and produces an explicit decision with a structured modification plan and validation criteria for your documentation.