Skepticoff-contract

nothing attached cannot establish identity

An absence is not a match. This is the degenerate input every harness should carry, because it is where a model is most likely to answer from the surrounding text alone.

The answer broke its own schema or a conditional rule. Terminal — nothing further is judged.

modelgemini-3.5-flash

temperature0

scenarioscenarios/skeptic/nothing-attached-cannot-establish-identity.json

cassette9f2af20b0d53be23…

latency0.0s

tokens1,291

Off-contract

The answer did not obey the schema that was posted with the request, or broke a rule a schema cannot state — such as “this field is required when and only when the verdict is ADD FIELD”. That gap is where a plausible but useless answer lives, so each agent closes it in code, and every one of those rules is itself tested.

mismatch_kind: a dissent must name what did not match

What the model was given

System instructionassembled from the contract schema, not hand-written

You have not seen the Inspector's conclusion and must not guess it. Answer only: does this evidence belong to THIS job, THIS machine and THIS moment? Doubt is your job. If you cannot establish identity, dissent.

Return JSON with these fields:
- belongs (boolean, required): False dissents. Dissent is a deterministic escalation trigger: the step does not pass and a named person is raised the same day.
- confidence (number, required): 0 to 1.
- rationale (string, required): What in the image, the asset history or the embedding distance decided it.
- mismatch_kind (one of asset | time | reuse | scene | none, null when it does not apply): reuse means this evidence appears to have been submitted before.
- prior_capture_ref (string, null when it does not apply): When mismatch_kind is reuse, the earlier capture this resembles.

## The machine this evidence is claimed to be of
{
  "asset id": "XYBER-07",
  "type": "e-bike",
  "make and model": "Segway Xyber",
  "distinguishing marks": [
    "a single spiral cable wrap on the right fork leg, the left leg bare",
    "unpainted light grey front mudguard"
  ],
  "known history": [
    "2026-05-02 front pads replaced",
    "2026-07-30 front tyre replaced",
    "2026-08-12 front brake service opened"
  ],
  "what recognising the model does NOT establish": "Confirming the make and model is not identifying this unit. The shop runs several machines of this exact model and colour, so a frame that would look the same photographed on any of them establishes nothing about which one this is. Identity comes from the distinguishing marks above, from a prior capture of this same unit, or from something in the frame unique to it. If none of those is present and there is nothing to compare against, you have not established identity, and the contract tells you what to do then: dissent, and say what was missing."
}

## The job this evidence is claimed to belong to
{
  "job id": "J-4471",
  "procedure": "Front brake service \u2014 Segway Xyber v3",
  "opened at": "2026-08-19T09:00:00Z",
  "location": "Workshop, El Chalt\u00e9n"
}

## The capture as recorded
{
  "kind": "photo",
  "created at": "2026-08-19T10:41:00Z",
  "mode": "live",
  "surface": "app_instrument",
  "note": "live means the frame came off an open camera stream on the device"
}

## The capture in question
This is what was just submitted.

Nothing was attached. You cannot establish identity from an absence.

What came backStructured output, not prose that was parsed afterwards: the contract schema is posted as the response schema, so the model returns this shape or fails.

{
  "belongs": false,
  "confidence": 1,
  "rationale": "No evidence was attached to the submission. It is impossible to establish identity or verify the asset, job, or moment from an absence of data.",
  "mismatch_kind": "none",
  "prior_capture_ref": null
}