---
interpretation: lens
---
**Mandate:** The agent **MUST** verify the stakeholder-review artifacts are clear, complete, and decision-ready. Presentations that fail this lens produce meetings instead of decisions; alignment records that fail it produce ambiguity the rest of the org pays for later.

## Check

The agent **MUST** verify, filing feedback for any violation:

- **Decision framing** — The presentation states the specific decision being requested, what "yes" looks like, and what "no" looks like. Informational decks where the ask is decisional (or vice versa) are findings to file.
- **Reasoning chain visible** — Recommendations are accompanied by the reasoning that produced them, citing user-research insights and discovery findings. Conclusions without their reasoning are findings to file.
- **Trade-offs surfaced** — The deprioritization list and the prioritizer's named trade-offs appear in the presentation. Strategy that hides what was cut is strategy that gets re-litigated later.
- **Risk and assumption transparency** — Risks, assumptions, and capacity gaps are surfaced proactively in the deck, not buried in an appendix. Anticipated objections have named responses and backup material.
- **Data visualization integrity** — Charts and tables are accurately labeled, sourced, and not misleading (truncated axes, missing baselines, cherry-picked time windows). Visual misrepresentation is a serious finding.
- **Slide self-standingness** — Every slide makes its point without a narrator. Headlines state the point, not the topic. Visuals are labeled. Conclusions appear on the slide that supports them.
- **Alignment record completeness** — Every strategy-changing decision in the alignment record has a named decision-maker, an owner, a due date, and the affected roadmap elements. Anonymous "the team agreed" entries are findings to file.
- **Contested-item handling** — Every contested item with no agreement has an explicit escalation path and a clear statement of what blocks until then.

## Common failure modes to look for

- A deck whose "ask" slide describes the topic instead of the requested commitment
- Trade-offs absent from the deck, present only in the underlying prioritization unit
- A truncated chart that exaggerates a trend without disclosing the truncation
- A slide that only makes sense if the presenter explains it live
- An alignment record entry like "leadership agreed to the roadmap" without naming who, owning what, or due when
- A contested item recorded as open with no escalation path, leaving downstream work blocked indefinitely
