[
  {
    "id": "J20",
    "action": "keep",
    "reason": "The note supports an investigation of two explanations without claiming either is established. Incident references and a focused effort to distinguish them are adequate for this use.",
    "question": null,
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "id": "J01",
    "action": "keep",
    "reason": "The historical audit supplies hypotheses for a desk comparison, with the platform extension explicitly identified as a possible limitation. The note makes no unsupported claim about current conditions.",
    "question": null,
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "id": "J19",
    "action": "keep",
    "reason": "Checked evidence supports this isolated rehearsal and its controls. The outstanding cybersecurity review concerns the later launch, so accepting the rehearsal does not establish launch readiness.",
    "question": null,
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "id": "J12",
    "action": "ask",
    "reason": "An unsupported percentage cannot justify dropping fatigue from investigation, even in an early ideas document. No supplied observation establishes that the claimed reduction is false, so the decisive gap is its evidential basis.",
    "question": "What measurement supports the claimed 25% fatigue reduction and its use to justify ending further fatigue investigation?",
    "confidence": "medium"
  },
  {
    "id": "J15",
    "action": "ask",
    "reason": "The diagram obscures a distinction on which the central comparison depends. Complete sources do not make that ambiguity merely cosmetic.",
    "question": "Which depicted connections already exist, and which are proposed?",
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "id": "J18",
    "action": "ask",
    "reason": "Observations from one rural town do not establish a regional winner or justify excluding the alternatives. Evidence connecting the comparison to differing districts is missing.",
    "question": "What comparative evidence establishes that the preferred design also outperforms the alternatives across the relevant urban and rural differences?",
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "id": "J11",
    "action": "ask",
    "reason": "The director's signature does not substantiate the untested production mappings. Demo-schema samples leave a specific gap in the claimed cutover readiness.",
    "question": "What production-based reconciliation establishes that the currently untested field mappings are correct?",
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "id": "J06",
    "action": "keep",
    "reason": "The sample supports testing a possible benefit within a specified duration and spending cap, with ownership, comparison, daily checks and a return condition. It need not already prove savings to justify this bounded trial.",
    "question": null,
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "id": "J14",
    "action": "keep",
    "reason": "The material claims, options, dependencies and uncertainties are adequate for the working discussion. Unfinished styling does not affect the stated use.",
    "question": null,
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "id": "J16",
    "action": "reject",
    "reason": "Permanently overwriting the only originals without restoration contradicts the recommendation's claim of reversibility and easy rollback. The trial must be redesigned or its recommendation revised; the spending cap and sound cleaning process do not resolve that contradiction.",
    "question": null,
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "id": "J08",
    "action": "keep",
    "reason": "The vendor claim is attributed, its untested comparability is disclosed, and it is used to generate explanatory questions. No budget or verified saving is inferred from it.",
    "question": null,
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "id": "J09",
    "action": "ask",
    "reason": "Acceptance as an exploratory lead did not validate an 18% saving for this site's budget. The decision-changing gap is whether the installations' results apply to this site's assets, workloads and costs.",
    "question": "What evidence connects the vendor results to this site's conditions and supports an achievable 18% reduction in next year's maintenance allowance?",
    "confidence": "medium"
  },
  {
    "id": "J10",
    "action": "keep",
    "reason": "The specialist's attestation is supported by production extracts, full mapping coverage and resolved exceptions. Separate director approval is explicitly retained and does not create a defect in the technical recommendation.",
    "question": null,
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "id": "J05",
    "action": "reject",
    "reason": "The verified reading above the operating limit directly contradicts the asserted adequate capacity, with no mitigation or reconciliation. Calling the opening a learning opportunity does not repair the recommendation.",
    "question": null,
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "id": "J07",
    "action": "ask",
    "reason": "The proposed start commits the organisation to an irreversible migration and annual cost before the two-week evaluation concludes. Four demo responses do not establish that this larger commitment is justified; irreversibility alone does not prove that migration is the wrong choice.",
    "question": "What migration and full-cost assessment supports terminating the existing arrangements and committing the annual licence before the evaluation can report?",
    "confidence": "medium"
  },
  {
    "id": "J17",
    "action": "keep",
    "reason": "The rural observations are explicitly a starting case for comparing concepts and identifying later case-selection differences. The note preserves the limits of that evidence and makes no regional ranking.",
    "question": null,
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "id": "J13",
    "action": "keep",
    "reason": "The arbitrary percentage is clearly a conditional illustration rather than an observed or forecast benefit. It can support discussion of possible value while the proposed study develops a fatigue measure.",
    "question": null,
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "id": "J03",
    "action": "keep",
    "reason": "The recent inspection establishes continued applicability of the older dimensional survey, and the specification and load have been checked against it. The retained procurement approval is a separate step.",
    "question": null,
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "id": "J04",
    "action": "keep",
    "reason": "The inconsistent model and incident evidence are the disclosed subjects of investigation. Comparing their timestamps and boundary conditions is appropriate before drawing a capacity conclusion.",
    "question": null,
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "id": "J02",
    "action": "ask",
    "reason": "The historical low-demand observation does not establish current demand after the extension and new peak service. The unsupported assertion that these changes are immaterial leaves the permanent removal recommendation unsubstantiated.",
    "question": "What current observation or supported comparison shows that the platform extension and new peak service have not materially changed demand at this boarding point?",
    "confidence": "high"
  }
]
