DOCA.6:4.2 - Make each stepping-stone claim testable

Name the later option or reachable region, the proposed enabling transition, and the evidence connecting the step to that later use. Ask what becomes possible, less costly, or better qualified because of this step, and what could show that the connection fails.

When a later opportunity is still unknown, a smaller retention claim may suffice: keep an examined construction for an affordable next question. C.40 supplies the development and continuation Method. Preserve the material, operation and conditions that let someone try that continuation. Judge its burden against what the next answer could change; do not invent a distant payoff or call this a qualified path to an unnamed opportunity.

Keep a candidate stepping stone distinct from one whose retention is justified under the stated policy. A plausible connection may justify a bounded inquiry, but does not by itself justify performing the step. State the value, burden, delay, uncertainty, and protected conditions that make retention worthwhile for this use.

A data-access question can be a candidate stepping stone toward representative evaluation. Its possible answers change which evaluation routes remain available. The question itself grants no access and establishes no model capability. A useful course, preliminary project, archive variant, or “zone of proximal development” label likewise needs the particular enabling relation and holder-owned evidence.

Do not require immediate dominance. Retention can be justified by later reachability, coverage, learning, or reversibility even when another candidate has a stronger current result. Conversely, novelty or diversity alone is not proof of future usefulness.