Grant research and drafts — qualification

Record status

Record ID

job:tilly:grant-research-and-drafts

Parent lifecycle

candidate

Page lane

qualification

Lane lifecycle

proposed

Owner

Tilly

Owner role

Pointguard and independent reviewer

Owner status

WORKING

Qualification result

NOT RUN · held for evidence and human review

Working browser surface: Agent jobs — builder overview — Inspect the package and stage a local project. This route is local-only; provider, credential, database, customer, publication, deployment, and production effects remain held.

Qualification status

Result

NOT RUN

Disposition

HELD

Reviewer

Not recorded

Receipt

Not recorded

This page defines proposed acceptance criteria for the qualification lane. It does not execute tests, establish compliance, qualify the subject, or authorize an effect.

Outcome definitions

Verified

All stated evidence and acceptance requirements passed for the exact reviewed revision; this still does not authorize deployment or an external effect.

Failed

One or more deterministic acceptance requirements failed with an inspectable reason.

Needs review

Evidence or interpretation is incomplete, conflicting, or awaits an identified human reviewer.

Held

Authority, required evidence, safe execution conditions, or a principal gate is absent.

The current record remains NOT RUN / HELD. These definitions describe candidate outcomes only.

Proposed deterministic acceptance tests

Route-resolution and distinct-content checks apply only to the admitted canonical routes in this record. Held source-proposed extensions are non-resolving proposals and are excluded.

• Deterministic qualification succeeds only when the opportunity has a named sponsor, identifiable opportunity, source locator, retrieval time, and source integrity field; otherwise state is held.
• Every material eligibility, amount, deadline, and restriction claim has at least one source receipt or is visibly marked unsupported.
• A second source or reviewer can reproduce each qualified claim from its locator and preserved evidence without relying on hidden context.
• A contradiction between sources is surfaced as contradicted and cannot be collapsed into a single confident value.
• An opportunity with an expired, missing, ambiguous, or timezone-unknown deadline cannot receive a qualified-open state.
• Internal workback dates are visibly labeled calculated and never appear as sponsor-stated deadlines.
• A draft with unsupported applicant facts, invented outcomes, invented partnerships, or missing citations remains draft-held and cannot be treated as a public claim.
• Tilly cannot transition her own evidence from Needs review to Approved.
• Funding commitments, credential access, final publication, and external submission remain held regardless of draft completeness.
• Changing another agent's source record is rejected or routed to that record's owner; a linked correction record may be proposed instead.
• A source with missing locator, unreadable content, altered checksum, or unclear provenance produces a source-failure state rather than a completed claim.
• Duplicate opportunity records are detected by sponsor, identifier, and source locator; suspected duplicates are linked and reviewed rather than merged silently.
• Search and indexing expose only records permitted by visibility state; private or held material is not presented as public or customer-indexed.
• Keyboard navigation reaches every form control, status, error, and review action; labels are programmatically associated with fields.
• Validation errors identify the field, explain the failure in plain language, preserve entered values, and do not rely on color alone.
• Drafts, notes, source references, and receipts preserve canonical IDs, origin, revisions, lifecycle, and provenance across updates.

Negative and held-state tests

• Stale grant pages or changed sponsor requirements
• Conflicting deadlines, timezones, or deadline semantics
• Eligibility inferred from a broad program description rather than stated requirements
• Doorway or keyword-spam documentation that adds no useful evidence
• Citation laundering through copied summaries without primary source locators
• Invented applicant qualifications, partners, budgets, outcomes, or prior funding
• Tilly approving her own evidence despite the never-rule
• Contradictions hidden during draft polishing
• Draft language mistaken for a funding commitment, submission, credential action, or public claim
• Sensitive organizational, financial, or personal information copied into broadly visible notes
• Accidental external send, publication, provider write, or database/customer indexing
• Loss of provenance, checksum, revision history, or record ownership
• Inaccessible error handling or status communication

Qualification claim boundary

Potentially allowed only after the stated evidence

• A proposal-only draft exists and identifies its current lifecycle.
• A source-labelled note or claim receipt records what a cited source says, with locator and verification metadata.
• A qualification remains Needs review, Held, supported, unsupported, contradicted, or stale-risk when that is the recorded state.
• An internal workback plan is calculated from a recorded deadline and clearly labeled as internal planning.
• A draft contains placeholders or limitations that are explicitly disclosed.

Still held

• The grant is open, available, or currently accepting applications without current verified evidence.
• The applicant or organization is eligible.
• A funding amount, award probability, deadline, sponsor policy, or program requirement is authoritative when evidence is missing or conflicting.
• Any funding commitment, submission, credential access, provider connection, database write, customer indexing, publication, or deployment occurred.
• A draft is approved, endorsed, submitted, funded, or a public claim.
• Tilly's evidence is independently approved when she performed the evidence work.
• A named native surface is a connected web feature or production system.

Sources and evidence

These pointers bind the page to evidence. They do not grant authority or collapse verification into deployment.

• agents/index.html#tilly
• source_record:job:tilly:grant-research-and-drafts
• OBSERVED_NATIVE_CONTRACT.project_and_field_guide_collections
• OBSERVED_NATIVE_CONTRACT.deadlines
• OBSERVED_NATIVE_CONTRACT.records
• OBSERVED_NATIVE_CONTRACT.pointguard
• APP_ROUTES:/app/pointguard/
• APP_ROUTES:/app/notebook/notes/
• APP_ROUTES:/app/notebook/files/
• APP_ROUTES:/app/notebook/approvals/
• APP_ROUTES:/app/notebook/field-guides/
• APP_ROUTES:/app/notebook/agent-logs/
• ALLOWED_INSTRUMENTS: no instrument selected; no calculation is required by the supplied job record