Conformance review Shipped
A different axis entirely: not code quality, but conformance to an explicit acceptance contract, criterion by criterion.
You pin a contract of atomic criteria before the work, and the oracle judges each one independently: met, unmet, or divergent. Divergent is the interesting verdict — the criterion was technically satisfied in a way that conflicts with what it existed to guarantee. A dedicated always-on conformance specialist acts as the coverage backstop, with in-lane domain specialists alongside it.
The three verdicts
| Criterion satisfied | Intent honoured | Counts as progress | |
|---|---|---|---|
| met | yes | yes | yes |
| unmet | no | no | no |
| divergent | yes | no | no |
The middle column is the whole reason there are three verdicts and not two. A build loop that only distinguished met from unmet would count a divergent criterion as forward motion.
It is the build loop's gate
This is the same command the build loop runs after every increment, writing the same machine-readable readiness file. That is deliberate: the thing that decides whether an increment moved forward is a full independent review, not a bespoke checker written for the loop.
myteams devteam plan code --from ./notes.md --name my-feature
myteams devteam review conformance HEAD --base main --contract <path>