E.19:4.4 - Decision outcomes

Complete the selected review scope before making an admission, refresh, or return-for-repair conclusion. A first defect or already-negative conclusion does not end the search for other independently obtainable findings. If a condition makes the remaining questions impossible to judge truthfully or safely, name the unexamined scope and the condition instead of presenting a partial result as complete.

Inspect, repair, and verify. Complete every in-scope review application, repair every defect through the relevant authoring work, and perform focused verification over the affected questions. The changed pattern edition and focused-verification claims are the substantive evidence and remain distinct from work; constitute one aggregate E.19 result episteme only when a receiving admission/refresh decision needs it. Record only an unresolved blocker, a decision outside current authority, or work that must transfer; do not create a parallel list retelling completed repairs.

Independent findings. Leave one compact C.2.1 findings-result episteme or handoff file containing all actionable in-scope defects and blockers, ordered by semantic impact, with repair direction precise enough that the author need not rediscover the diagnosis. If the selected questions reveal no defect, create neither an empty pass report nor positive checklist recital. The findings result is not the dated review work or an authority-bearing admission decision.

If a governing admission, refresh, E.21, DRR, publication, or release decision requires a durable conclusion or value, use its existing result. That result may cite E.19 findings or the repaired candidate; it does not turn per-question positive outcomes into a second review record.

Precision-remediation order. When a defect sentence combines a generic head, a claim-bearing qualifier, and mixed comparison-criterion pressure, remediation SHOULD follow the precision-before-coarsening rule in F.19:4. That rule supplies the head/qualifier/comparison order and the recoverable precise interpretation required for a later Plain, didactic, or coarsened restatement.

Kind-restoration verification. A wording, naming, or F.19 phrase-level repair does not succeed merely because the old trigger word disappeared. Recheck the pre-repair and post-repair kind, relation or claim kind, admissible use, and scope. If the repair narrows, widens, splits, or changes them without an accepted decision, repair it or keep the defect unresolved. The repaired object, focused verification, or governing decision carries this evidence; E.19 does not require a per-repair pass account.

Ordering and effort. Put ontology, semantics, modularity, and SoTA defects in FPF-governed sections before compact low-signal formatting findings. If semantic defects are present, address them before mechanical edits; formatting and micro-typos must not dominate the work by volume.