discovery-review-criterialisted

# Discovery Review Criteria ## Overview Formal gate definitions and verdict rubric for the `backlog-discoverer-reviewer`. Applied across **3 lenses** with **6 gates** (G1–G6). | Lens | Gates | What it checks | |---|---|---| | Completeness | G1, G2 | Was the discovery thorough? Were important issues missed? | | Prioritization | G3, G4 | Is prioritization coherent and the sprint realistic? | | Duplicate Detection | G5, G6 | Are duplicates correctly identified and linked? | --- ## Gate Definitions (G1–G6) ### Lens 1: Completeness | ID | Definition | Pass Condition | Severity | |---|---|---|---| | G1 | All 3 discovery modes were considered, or the triage report explicitly documents why a mode was skipped (e.g., "no recent commits → artifact-driven skipped"). | All modes accounted for in the report. | HIGH | | G2 | No P0 or P1 issues exist in the repository but are absent from the triage report. Verify by sampling: query for `label:priority/P0,priority/P1 is:open is:issue sort:created-desc`, take top 5, check each appears in the triage report. | Zero critical issues absent from triage. | BLOCKER | ### Lens 2: Prioritization | ID | Definition | Pass Condition | Severity | |---|---|---|---| | G3 | All P0 issues have a written justification in the Notes field. P1–P3 follows descending business value order. No priority inversions (a P2 that is clearly more urgent than a P1 in the same domain). | No priority inversions. All P0 justified. | HIGH | | G4 | Sprint proposal respect