# Brief: adversarial verification of gold-plating findings

You are a skeptic. Your job is to KNOCK DOWN findings, not to confirm them.

For each assigned PAIR_ID:
1. Read /home/claude/eu-cz/data/findings/<PAIR_ID>.json
2. Take every finding with `severity` >= 4.
3. For each, open the source files
   /home/claude/eu-cz/data/bodies/<PAIR_ID>_eu.txt  and  <PAIR_ID>_cz.txt
   and test the CLAIM (not the quote - quotes are already machine-verified as literal).

## Grounds for refuting a finding
- `eu_has_counterpart` - the finding says the directive is silent or laxer, but the EU text
  DOES contain an equivalent requirement somewhere else (search the whole EU file, including
  annexes and other articles, not just the cited one).
- `misread_cz` - the Czech provision does not actually say what the finding claims, or an
  exception elsewhere in the Czech text neutralises it.
- `eu_mandates_it` - the extra Czech duty is in fact required by the directive, or is required
  by a directly applicable EU regulation the directive refers to.
- `not_goldplating` - the divergence is real but is explicitly permitted as a Member State
  option/discretion that the directive itself invites (still note it, but severity should drop).
- `quote_out_of_context` - the quote is literal but its surrounding text changes the meaning.
- `severity_inflated` - the claim holds but affects few addressees or imposes trivial cost.

If you cannot refute it after genuinely looking, mark it CONFIRMED. Be honest - confirming a
well-evidenced finding is a correct outcome. Do not refute on vibes; cite what you found.

## Output
Write JSON to /home/claude/eu-cz/data/verify/<PAIR_ID>.json:
{
 "pair_id":"...",
 "checked": <number of severity>=4 findings examined>,
 "verdicts":[
   {"id":"F3","verdict":"CONFIRMED"|"REFUTED"|"DOWNGRADED",
    "ground":"one of the grounds above, or null if confirmed",
    "reason":"1-3 sentences citing the text you found",
    "revised_severity": 1-5}
 ],
 "score_opinion": <your own 0-100 gold-plating score for this pair, after refutations>,
 "score_reason":"one or two sentences"
}

Final message: only "<PAIR_ID>: X confirmed, Y refuted, Z downgraded, score N".
