# Assessment Evidence Review evals

Each scenario describes an input situation and the behaviors a correct review must
exhibit. They exercise the principles that protect the report: never fabricating
evidence, reporting absence neutrally (and keeping "Partially documented" distinct from
"Not found in materials reviewed"), producing no verdict or suitability statement,
staying publisher-agnostic and non-disparaging, using the Deeper Signals evidence file
only for Deeper Signals tools, and never evaluating a candidate.

`fixtures/sample_review.json` is a complete, valid `review.json` (the Deeper Signals Core
Drivers Diagnostic reviewed for UK manager selection). Use it to validate the build
pipeline end to end:

```bash
python3 scripts/build_audit_content.py evals/fixtures/sample_review.json /tmp/meta.json /tmp/content.json
node booklet/scripts/generate_booklet.js /tmp/content.json /tmp/out.docx booklet/assets
python3 booklet/scripts/embed_fonts.py /tmp/out.docx booklet/assets/fonts
```

Scenarios:

1. `01_manual_selection_neutral.md` - uploaded manual, selection, mixed evidence, neutral framing
2. `02_no_evidence_available.md` - no manual, no search permitted
3. `03_search_only_debated_model.md` - search-only, model debated in the literature
4. `04_development_use_emphasis.md` - same evidence, development use, different emphasis (no verdict)
5. `05_candidate_evaluation_refusal.md` - user asks the skill to score candidates
6. `06_deeper_signals_source_of_truth.md` - Deeper Signals tool plus a competitor in one request
7. `07_battery_review.md` - a multi-instrument battery
8. `08_builder_and_pagination_validation.md` - mechanical validation of the builder and page-setting
