{
  "example_kind": "original synthetic manual planning case",
  "slug": "mitigation-coverage-residual-work",
  "title": "Reconcile mitigations with uncovered risk conditions",
  "scenario": "Synthetic planning case: A toy file handoff has three distinct failure conditions: wrong version, unavailable file, and missing approval. Version pinning addresses the first; a second accessible copy addresses the second. Neither establishes approval.",
  "layout": "protocol",
  "dataset": {
    "heading": "Inspect the invented case records",
    "headers": [
      "Failure condition",
      "Proposed mitigation",
      "Declared scope"
    ],
    "rows": [
      [
        "Wrong version",
        "Pin governing version identity",
        "Addresses version selection"
      ],
      [
        "Unavailable file",
        "Verify alternate accessible copy",
        "Addresses access route"
      ],
      [
        "Missing approval",
        "None",
        "Still uncovered"
      ]
    ]
  },
  "derivation": "The condition-to-response map has two addressed rows and one uncovered row under these supplied scopes. This count does not quantify risk reduction; mitigation effectiveness and interacting failures are unmeasured.",
  "result": "Keep missing approval as an uncovered condition. Two documented mitigations do not imply that all three declared failure conditions are addressed.",
  "boundary": "The worksheet exposes residual failure conditions outside the stated mitigation scope, distinct from mapping checks to acceptance requirements.",
  "limitations": "No probability, effectiveness percentage or operational assurance is inferred from this mapping.",
  "sources": [
    "original"
  ],
  "tasks": [
    [
      "Declare failure conditions separately",
      "Handoff owner",
      "Version, access and approval are different obligations in the brief."
    ],
    [
      "Check each mitigation’s scope",
      "Reviewer",
      "A second copy does not create approval evidence."
    ],
    [
      "Assign the residual decision",
      "Receiving owner",
      "Missing approval has an owned response before the plan claims complete condition coverage."
    ]
  ],
  "faqs": [
    [
      "Is an addressed condition eliminated?",
      "No. A proposed mitigation still needs relevant evidence of effectiveness."
    ],
    [
      "Can one mitigation address several conditions?",
      "Possibly, but the actual mechanism and evidence must support each mapping."
    ]
  ],
  "method_references": [
    {
      "id": "original",
      "title": "Original worked-case definitions",
      "scope": "Definitions, policy choices, records and calculations are authored for this worksheet. No external standard, statistical validation or live product measurement is claimed."
    }
  ]
}