git:20260816.5f274f5 to git:20260816.97cfa7d

# CLAUDE.md — clawock decision runs

You are the model side of a clawock decision run. Claude Code owns

conversation, memory and tools; clawock owns the decision contract. Your job

is one file in, one file out.

## When to engage

When a clawock request file is present (`.clawock/work/<run_id>/request.json`,

the `request_file` path printed by `clawock run prepare`), or when the user

asks to run the investment-decision workflow. On a fresh machine the workspace

must be created once first: `clawock init book --workflow

investment-decision` (see [`../../README.md`](../../README.md) — "From zero").

## The loop

1. **Read the request.** `request.json` contains the certified `context`

(with sha256 fingerprints), the `task`, and `workflow.parameters`

(evidence and opposing-case minimums, confidence cap without a primary

source).

2. **Write `decision.json`** at the workspace root (artifact paths resolve

against the workspace root, not the request directory). Minimal shape:

```json

{

"schema_version": 1,

"workflow": {"id": "investment-decision", "version": "1.1.0"},

"decision_id": "example-2026-08-08",

"as_of": "2026-08-08T08:00:00+00:00",

"subject": {"ticker": "EXAMPLE", "market": "US", "currency": "USD"},

"evidence": [

{"id": "filing-growth", "stance": "supporting",

"summary": "The latest filed revenue figure grew year over year.",

"source": "issuer filing", "source_class": "primary",

"observed_at": "2026-08-08T07:30:00+00:00"},

{"id": "valuation-risk", "stance": "opposing",

"summary": "The current market multiple is above its stated range.",

"source": "market data snapshot", "source_class": "market",

"observed_at": "2026-08-08T07:45:00+00:00"}

],

"debate": {

"bull_case": {"summary": "Filed growth supports continued monitoring.",

"evidence_ids": ["filing-growth"]},

"bear_case": {"summary": "Valuation leaves insufficient margin of safety.",

"evidence_ids": ["valuation-risk"]}

},

"thesis": {

"statement": "Momentum is constructive, but price does not compensate for valuation risk.",

"confidence": 0.7,

"invalidation_conditions": ["Filed growth reverses"]

},

"decision": {

"action": "watch",

"rationale": "The opposing valuation evidence blocks an entry.",

"evidence_ids": ["filing-growth", "valuation-risk"],

"order": null

}

}

```

3. **Run `clawock run publish`** with the request and your artifact:

```bash

clawock run publish \

--request .clawock/work/<run_id>/request.json \

--artifact decision.json=decision.json

```

4. **Report the receipt** — `status` and `run_id` — and stop. Do not edit the

receipt, do not re-grade the decision, do not "improve" the artifact after

publish; Python settles.

## Non-negotiables (enforced by `clawock run publish`)

- `debate.bull_case` and `debate.bear_case` are both required and each cites

its evidence; the bear case must cite opposing-stance evidence — publish

fails without it. Python checks that linkage, not sincerity: make the bear

case a genuine counterargument — that honesty is yours.

- Every `evidence` row needs `stance`, `source_class` and an `observed_at` no

later than `as_of`.

- All `evidence_ids` references must exist; conclusions in

`thesis.statement` and `decision.rationale` should be backed by cited

evidence.

- Order amounts must reconcile to the cent; never invent prices, FX or sizes.

- Confidence above the workflow cap requires a cited primary source.