Red-team review · before the work advances
Imagine the failure before a connector, public draft, provider change, or research promotion ships. A proposal stays blocked until every lane is answered.
Promotion rule
A proposal remains blocked until the failure hypothesis, disconfirmation path, approval owner, and verification evidence are named.
State the most likely way this work could harm privacy, trust, correctness, cost, or Joshua's agency before building further.
Name the evidence that would falsify the plan, weaken the thesis, or force a smaller safer slice.
Surface any boundary that requires Joshua's explicit approval rather than allowing local automation to proceed.
Record the test, build, smoke, safety scan, or review artifact that proves the safe slice is real.
Could move secrets, billing, or live data across a boundary without explicit approval.
Verify a read-only mock or documented review gate satisfies the need before wiring a provider.
Provider credentials, paid API use, and config changes require Joshua approval.
Documented provider review gate plus focused tests before any live integration branch.
Could imply Demerzel has authority to publish under Joshua's identity.
Check whether a draft/review queue is sufficient and that no public-write endpoint exists.
Public X, email, website, and account actions remain approval-gated.
Visible draft-only copy, no execution controls, and safety scan over production files.
Could turn social chatter into a thesis, watchlist promotion, or financial implication too early.
Require source provenance, primary/non-social corroboration, disconfirmation, and evidence grade.
Financial actions, public recommendations, and provider wiring remain blocked.
Evidence gate rubric link, source freshness, and explicit blocked-action guardrails.