# Brief: provision-level EU -> CZ gold-plating analysis

You compare one EU instrument against the Czech law that implements it.

## Input files (already on disk, Czech language, enacting terms only)
- EU text:  /home/claude/eu-cz/data/bodies/<PAIR_ID>_eu.txt   (Czech-language version of the EU act)
- CZ text:  /home/claude/eu-cz/data/bodies/<PAIR_ID>_cz.txt   (consolidated Czech act, or the relevant sections)

Read BOTH in full (use `sed -n` in chunks if large). Do not rely on prior knowledge for the text —
prior knowledge is only for orientation. Every finding must be traceable to a quote in the files.

## What counts as gold-plating (over-implementation)
1. `scope`            - wider personal or material scope than the directive requires
2. `deadline`         - shorter time limits imposed on private parties than the EU minimum
3. `penalty`          - higher fines / broader liability than the directive requires
4. `reporting`        - registration, notification, record-keeping or reporting duties not required by the EU act
5. `exemption_removed`- a derogation/exemption the directive offers that CZ did not use
6. `supervisory`      - extra supervisory powers, inspections, approvals, permits
7. `documentation`    - extra mandatory documents, forms, plans, appointments of officers
8. `earlier_entry`    - obligations applied earlier than the EU deadline
9. `structure`        - fragmentation: the duty is split across several acts/decrees, making it harder to follow

Under-implementation (Czech law LESS strict / narrower than required) also matters - record it with
`direction: "under"`. Faithful copy-out is `direction: "equal"` and normally not worth a finding.

## Hard rules
- Quote verbatim. `evidence_cz` must be a literal substring of the CZ file. `evidence_eu` must be a
  literal substring of the EU file, OR exactly the string `SMĚRNICE MLČÍ` when the EU act has no
  counterpart provision.
- If you cannot find the text, do not report the finding. Precision over volume.
- Aim for 6-15 findings. Quality and citability matter more than count.
- `severity` 1-5: 1 = cosmetic, 3 = real added compliance cost, 5 = major burden on every addressee.
- Be even-handed. If the Czech act is a faithful, well-drafted transposition, say so and report few findings.
  Some Czech acts are genuinely close copies - do not manufacture gold-plating.

## Output
Write JSON to /home/claude/eu-cz/data/findings/<PAIR_ID>.json with exactly this shape:

{
 "pair_id": "...",
 "verdict_cz": "2-4 věty česky - jak věrná je transpozice",
 "verdict_en": "2-4 sentences in English",
 "goldplating_score": 0-100,
 "score_rationale": "why that number",
 "penalty_eu": "what the directive says about sanctions (quote/paraphrase + article)",
 "penalty_cz": "max fine in CZK under the Czech act + section",
 "findings": [
   {"id":"F1","type":"scope","direction":"over","severity":4,
    "cz_provision":"§ 9 odst. 2 písm. b)","eu_provision":"čl. 13 odst. 1",
    "eu_requirement":"short statement of the EU minimum",
    "cz_requirement":"short statement of what CZ requires instead",
    "delta":"one line: what extra burden this creates",
    "eu_value":null,"cz_value":null,"unit":null,
    "evidence_eu":"verbatim quote or SMĚRNICE MLČÍ",
    "evidence_cz":"verbatim quote"}
 ],
 "caveats": "anything that limits confidence (scope mismatch, consolidated version dates, etc.)"
}

Return as your final message ONLY a two-line summary: the score and the number of findings.
The JSON file on disk is the deliverable.
