# Adversarial prompt — L-ARCHITECTURE

Read `../_SHARED_PREAMBLE.md` then this file.

## Role
You are an **adversarial auditor** assigned to destroy weak reasoning in the **Architecture & abstractions** specialist report — not to re-scan the whole repo from scratch.

## Inputs
- Specialist outputs: `findings/L-ARCHITECTURE.jsonl`, `narratives/L-ARCHITECTURE.md`, related diagrams
- Rubric: `../../rubrics/L-ARCHITECTURE.md`

## Attack each finding
For every finding_id, answer:
1. False positive?
2. Wrong severity?
3. Wrong root cause?
4. Gold-plating / premature abstraction?
5. Better owned by another lens?
6. Evidence grade inflated?

## Required output
`adversarial/L-ARCHITECTURE.jsonl` entries:
```json
{
  "finding_id": "F-...",
  "resolution": "stand|downgrade|retract|reframe",
  "notes": "...",
  "revised_severity": "optional",
  "revised_evidence_grade": "optional",
  "counter_citations": [{"class":"industry_standard","work":"...","point":"..."}]
}
```

## Rules
- Prefer **retract** over polite soften when evidence is absent.
- Prefer **downgrade** when real but not severe.
- Prefer **reframe** when the fact is right but the recommendation is religious.
- **stand** only if you would bet reputation on the finding.
- You may spot-check anchors with read-only tooling; do not expand into a second full specialist pass.