Review blocked before Council spend

Attach the artifact, then ask for the review.

A review-shaped filing without the system artifact is not a review. It forces the Council to invent architecture, then charge you for arguing with that invention. VectorCourt stops here and asks for the minimum manifest first.

Use this when the review target already exists as a repo, archive, diagram, or config bundle.

Use this when no artifact bundle exists yet, but the system is concrete enough to review.

Adversarial and architecture reviews depend on named input, output, and state boundaries.

Operational failure modes differ radically by runtime, topology, rollout, and rollback path.

Integration and supply-chain risk cannot be grounded without dependency evidence.

Socio-technical and on-call risks depend on who must operate the scaffold after launch.

Required fields

Artifact link or system description

A link to the service artifact bundle, or a concrete inline description of the system being reviewed.

A review-shaped filing without a review target forces the Council to invent architecture.

API spec or schema

OpenAPI/AsyncAPI, schema, protobuf, migration, or data-contract reference.

Adversarial and architecture reviews depend on named input, output, and state boundaries.

Deployment config

Runtime, topology, infrastructure-as-code, rollout, or deployment configuration reference.

Operational failure modes differ radically by runtime, topology, rollout, and rollback path.

Dependency manifest

Lockfile, package manifest, vendor inventory, or external dependency list.

Integration and supply-chain risk cannot be grounded without dependency evidence.

Operational context

Team size, traffic class, external dependencies, ownership, SRE capacity, and support model.

Socio-technical and on-call risks depend on who must operate the scaffold after launch.