inspectlisted

# Review documentation ## Deterministic findings (already decided, do not re-litigate) !`docgov check --json --compact 2>&1 | head -c 10000` ## What to review Everything above is settled by software. Your job is the part software cannot decide. Work only on these four questions, and say plainly when the answer is "this is fine". ### 1. Audience fit — apply the right lens Read the lens for the document's class in `lenses/<lens>.md` and judge against it, not against your general taste. The lenses are: `readme`, `developer`, `architecture`, `security`, `user`, `agent`, `operations`. A document that is excellent under the wrong lens is a defect: an architecture essay inside a getting-started guide fails even if every sentence is true. ### 2. Contradictions Run `docgov inspect contradictions --json`. You get narrowed candidate pairs with excerpts, not a verdict. For each: - **Genuine contradiction** — two documents state incompatible facts. The higher-authority document is presumed right; name which one must change and why. - **Equal authority** — no tie-break exists. This is the dangerous case. Escalate it to the user rather than picking. - **Acceptable overlap** — different audiences saying the same thing differently. Leave it. Quote the conflicting sentences. A contradiction report without the two sentences in it is unactionable. ### 3. Agent readiness Could a different agent act on this document without making a wrong assumption? Check for: unstated prerequisite