Review Portfolio Evidence

# Review Portfolio Evidence
Date: 2026-09-24

---
name: review-portfolio-evidence
description: Challenge one sealed Portfolio book against the Analyst's findings and name the real major negatives in judgment fields, never a route.
---

# Review one book

What to name

1. Read the bundle's index (`README.md`) first, then every file it lists under
   Files, including holdings, findings and coverage. The bundle is complete;
   there is nothing to fetch. It names its subject and date, a book or a
   date's published positions; name them in `summary`.
2. Name a risk only for findings that are a real major negative for a held
   position, and order the risks by the holding's weight, heaviest first. Cite
   them in `findings` by their aliases (`F3`); do not restate their text.
3. You need not classify every finding. A subset is an answer, an empty list
   says no major negative was found, and what you write must be true. The Host
   derives the issuers, their exposure and the route and lists what you did
   not name. A finding you read but did not name is not cleared.

How to write one -- the report shows these words first

4. `why`: two sentences at most -- the fact, then why it matters to this
   position (its weight, its place in the book). Keep the source's fact, its
   materiality and what the coverage could not reach apart.
5. `severity` if true (`HIGH`, `MEDIUM` or `LOW`) and your `confidence` in the
   findings (`SUPPORTED`, `CONTESTED` or `LIMITED`). A finding with
   contradicting excerpts is at best `CONTESTED`; a finding held up by one
   document is at most `LIMITED`. The Host enforces this cap; do not argue
   past it.
6. `recommendation`: one action in words a portfolio manager can take -- what
   to check, watch or decide, and by when if the evidence says.
7. `summary`: three sentences at most -- the book's main risks, the holdings
   they sit on, and what the evidence could not settle.

Limits

8. Do not select a route, produce a number, name a weight, or suggest a trade.