LensReading which lens this session carries.
EN4C-1023Evidence postedmedium materiality

Pull request at team review

Simon Sandoval

Engineering · Code Review & Quality · EN4C Convention Change

$82k

value

82%

confidence

37

people affected

11h 7m

age

8h 41m

sla

50%

progress

Currently held by

Coverage Agent

An agent owns the next move

Raised by

Beatriz Raman

Requester of record

At station

Team review

Policy layer · station 2 of 4

Where this train is on the line

EN4CConvention ChangeTransactional · 4 stations

Propose

19 q

Team review

1 live

Ratify

4 q

Enforce

3 q

Evidence trail

Every station this unit has passed, who acted, and what they left behind

This is the readable trail.

  1. Cleared propose

    -667m

    Static Analysis Agent

    Inputs, rule version and output hash written to the evidence log

  2. Holding at team review

    -334m

    Director, Engineering Quality

    Inputs, rule version and output hash written to the evidence log

What happens next

The next station and its rule

Ratify

run by Director, Engineering Quality · Policy layer

Held for a named human when the unit exceeds the pull request decision envelope, when confidence falls below the floor, or when a policy clause is engaged.

approver Director, Engineering Quality

Why the signal is what it is

Derived from time against commitment, not from the state

Amber. Either this item is at or past the time it was committed to and is not material enough to escalate, or it is inside the time but has burned three quarters of it while carrying high or critical materiality. Amber says nothing about who holds it: an item can be amber and moving normally through an agent.

clock 11h 7m against a commitment of 8h 41m · 128% of the time used
materiality medium · blast radius 37 records or people downstream
state evidence-posted — held separately, and deliberately not part of this reading

Past SLA by 2h 26m · 37 people or records downstream of this decision