F.12:6 - The binding, as eight practical rules

R1 — Match the promise to delivery. Use A.2.3 to keep the exact promise content, PromiseContentUse, delivered outcome, and fulfilment relations distinct for the Work occurrence or population being judged. An abstract service label or lexical cell is not enough, and the later evaluation does not make those delivery-side relations obtain.

R2 — First test for direct measurement. Ask whether the observation and measurement model directly concern the promised characteristic of the relevant Work outcome inside the window. If they do, use C.16 for measurement and A.10 for evidence use; add no proxy relation. Commands, approvals, and MethodDescriptions are not outcome evidence by themselves.

R3 — Recover any real indicator relation. If a distinct observed indicator stands in for the promised characteristic or outcome, name both participants and cite the pattern that defines or tests that exact relation. Use C.16.P to recover the construction and distortion risk. If no current rule supplies the relation, stop with A.6.RCD missing-governor; do not treat the word proxy, A.10 evidence use, or B.3 reliance as its substitute. Use E.13 only when the indicator is optimized or used as a target, incentive, gate, release argument, reputation signal, repair target, or decision driver.

R4 — Perform the evaluation. Recover each evaluator’s A.13 core and let A.15.1 independently admit the dated evaluation Work, including the actual evaluation Method it enacts, as required by A.2.3:4.3. Add F.6 only when the account needs precise attribution through that same obtaining assignment. Identify the A.6.1 operation application, its selected facts and state references, the applied acceptance rule, and the result binding. Surface a particular MethodDescription edition only when selecting that edition changes the result or its replay.

R5 — Use the declared result scale. Name the characteristic, scale, unit, aggregation, comparison, and admissible result values through the acceptance specification’s verdictScaleDescriptionRef. Typical calculation shapes include:

• a value at or above, or at or below, a threshold;
• a stated percentile at or below a target;
• a share such as good time divided by total time;
• an event count within a limit;
• all relevant values remaining inside a band.

The calculation shape does not select a verdict scale. Use the exact scale declared by the acceptance specification.

R6 — State every needed relation directly. Use A.2.3 for promise use, delivery, and fulfilment; C.16 for observation and measurement; the defining or testing pattern for any indicator relation; A.10 for the descriptive evidence-provenance path and bounded reliance on independently established direct relations; B.3 only for an actual named assurance claim; and F.9 only when distinct local meanings themselves require a semantic relation. One generic Bridge cannot establish clause–Work fit, measurement, indicator validity, evidence, evaluation, status, or fulfilment. A passing reliance disposition requires the evidence demanded by the acceptance claim and its direct rule; a descriptive path alone is insufficient.

R7 — Keep the window and population explicit. A monthly verdict, a batch verdict, and an incident verdict are different claims. A new promise, monitor, or window does not rewrite an earlier verdict.

R8 — Preserve result, status, and assertion boundaries. Keep the operation result on its declared acceptance scale. Map it to RequirementStatus=Satisfied or RequirementStatus=Violated only through the exact F.10 rule. If evidence coverage, indicator adequacy, scale conversion, or relation support is insufficient, use EvidenceStatus=Inconclusive, leave RequirementStatus=Pending, or return the exact local result declared by the acceptance scale. Create a C.2.1 verdict episteme only when another use needs that durable assertion.