{
  "scope": "Existing 12 frozen incident-rule regression cases. Does not test the new planning contract or demonstrate AI performance.",
  "checkedAt": "2026-11-02T09:00:35.550Z",
  "exitCode": 0,
  "error": null,
  "passedCases": 12,
  "failedCases": 0,
  "output": "PASS eval-01: Interior window positive control\nPASS eval-02: Inclusive 30-minute and zero boundaries; millisecond outside and future excluded\nPASS eval-03: Unverified change clock cannot associate despite plausible timestamps\nPASS eval-04: Received time cannot supply missing signal occurrence\nPASS eval-05: Unknown change or signal service abstains\nPASS eval-06: Cross-service proximity does not become dependency association\nPASS eval-07: Conflicting change identity excludes every conflicting copy\nPASS eval-08: Conflicting signal identity excludes every conflicting copy\nPASS eval-09: Repeated deliveries remain visible without multiplying pairs\nPASS eval-10: Equal record IDs from unique producers remain distinct\nPASS eval-11: Recovery signal is retained but does not prove restoration\nPASS eval-12: Coincidental unrelated same-service change passes proximity filter\n12/12 cases pass; 0 retained failures.\n",
  "limitation": "Originally authored separately before rule-body inspection. Now a known regression set, not a fresh held-out evaluation. Passing the coincidental-change case demonstrates a limitation, not causal accuracy."
}