What
Improve the document-driven review path by making scenario selection and mock evidence handling more explicit and less brittle.
Motivation
The current launch story correctly emphasizes document-driven decision review, but there are two follow-up gaps:
- scenario detection is heuristic and can misroute some prompts
- the mock adapter responds to supporting files via keyword-sensitive evidence checks, which is useful for demos but still brittle
Scope
- add an explicit CLI scenario override for
ac debate
- surface the detected scenario in CLI output and/or debate artifacts
- review keyword-based evidence checks in
adapters/mock.py
- improve mock-path behavior so attached files influence judgments more transparently and predictably
- add tests covering misrouting and override behavior
Why this matters
This would make the document-driven demo path more robust and easier to trust, especially for first-time users evaluating the project through the mock adapter.
What
Improve the document-driven review path by making scenario selection and mock evidence handling more explicit and less brittle.
Motivation
The current launch story correctly emphasizes document-driven decision review, but there are two follow-up gaps:
Scope
ac debateadapters/mock.pyWhy this matters
This would make the document-driven demo path more robust and easier to trust, especially for first-time users evaluating the project through the mock adapter.