Final Decision

Final Decision

Compiles the complete, evidence-based standing of a candidate and presents it to the human so they can approve or reject it. This Skill drafts nothing on the human's behalf and never implies its own summary or recommendation IS the decision. Full explanation of what each status means lives in references/decision-framework.md; the exact gate/state/ranking mechanics live in references/decision-gates.md. Read both before using this Skill.

When to use this

• Once a candidate reaches HUMAN_REVIEW (the natural end of the happy-path chain — see decision-gates.md SM-04).
• Or at any earlier point, as an interim standing check, via hunt rank alone — this is safe to run repeatedly and has no side effects beyond recording the recomputed final_status (decision-framework.md).

Step 1 — Get current standing

hunt rank <run_id>

This re-applies hard gates and Pareto ranking using only evidence already collected (fetches nothing new). It sets final_status to REJECTED (gate fired), NEEDS_MORE_DATA (gates passed, zero ranking dimensions computed), or PROMISING (gates passed, Pareto-ranked) — never QUALIFIED. Always re-run this rather than relying on a standing computed earlier in the conversation; new evidence may have changed it.

Step 2 — Get the full evidence report

hunt show <opportunity_id>

This is the full evidence-first report. Every section without data says so explicitly (NOT_YET_ANALYZED, NO_DATA, NOT_PROVIDED, etc.) — never a silent omission (REP-01). Use this, not memory of earlier conversation turns, as the source of truth for what's actually recorded.

Step 3 — Present everything, organized and complete

Present to the human, in full:

• Which gates ran and their result (per decision-gates.md GATE-01/02) — and if any fired, exactly which CONFIRMED_* value fired it. Never imply a gate fired on a SUSPECTED_*/PENDING_*/UNKNOWN value — that is structurally impossible.
• The four ranking dimensions (decision-gates.md RANK-03) — which are present, their actual values, and which are omitted because that stage hasn't run yet. Never treat an omitted dimension as if it scored zero.
• Demand — from hunt demand-show/report data, including the qualification and its advisory (non-enforced) status.
• Competition — competitor autopsy findings from hunt show.
• VOC / customer pain points — from review analysis and/or manually recorded pain points, including severity distribution.
• Differentiation — the copycat-resistance classification if the stage has run, NOT_YET_ANALYZED if not.
• Red team — EVIDENCED vs. HYPOTHESIS findings, distinctly labeled.
• Economics — the full base case and stress-test results from hunt economics-show, or NOT_PROVIDED if economics-set was never called (economics.md ECON-11). Never compute or restate these numbers differently than what the CLI printed.
• Supplier/IP status — the recorded supplier_status/ip_status (default UNKNOWN if never set), and whether either is human-confirmed.
• What's still missing — explicitly list every stage/field not yet recorded, so the human can see the gaps as clearly as the findings.

Step 4 — Hand the decision to the human, explicitly

State the current final_status (PROMISING/REJECTED/ NEEDS_MORE_DATA) and what it actually means per decision-framework.md — in particular, if PROMISING, say plainly that this is a gate-pass technicality, not a business verdict, and summarize exactly which dimensions support it. Then present the decision command for the human to run themselves:

hunt decide <opportunity_id> approve --reason "<human's own reasoning>"
hunt decide <opportunity_id> reject --reason "<human's own reasoning>"

This Skill may summarize tradeoffs if asked, but must not draft the --reason text as if it were the human's own words, must not run hunt decide itself under any circumstance, and must not phrase its own summary in a way that could be mistaken for the decision itself having already been made.

What this Skill must never do

• Never call hunt decide itself, for either approve or reject.
• Never present a PROMISING result as if it were a positive verdict on the product's viability.
• Never imply that a REJECTED gate result reflects human judgment when it was actually automatic (or vice versa) — always be clear which is which (decision-framework.md).
• Never omit a "still missing" section — an incomplete picture presented as if it were complete is itself a form of hallucination by omission.

See references/decision-framework.md for the full explanation of what each status means and the relationship between hunt rank and hunt decide, and references/decision-gates.md for the exact gate/state/ ranking mechanics and rule-preservation table.