# REVIEW — OBPI-0.23.0-01-closing-argument

**Reviewer:** spec-reviewer agent
**Date:** 2026-03-28
**Verdict:** PASS

## Promises vs Delivery

| # | Requirement | Met? | Evidence |
|---|------------|------|----------|
| 1 | Rename "Value Narrative" to "Closing Argument" in template | YES | `.github/skills/gz-obpi-brief/assets/OBPI_BRIEF-template.md` — `### Closing Argument (Lite)` and `### Closing Argument (Heavy)` present; zero `### Value Narrative` headings |
| 2 | Add completion-time authoring guidance | YES | Template HTML comments: "authored at COMPLETION, not during planning" in both lanes |
| 3 | Require three elements: what was built, what it enables, why it matters | YES | Both Lite and Heavy sections contain all three elements with descriptions |
| 4 | Template validation test rejecting planning-phase placeholders | YES | `tests/test_obpi_template.py` — 6 tests covering section existence, both lanes, no Value Narrative heading, completion guidance, three elements, no planning placeholders |

**Promises met:** 4/4

## Documentation Quality

**Assessment:** substantive

Brief has clear ADR alignment, anti-pattern awareness, concrete verification commands, and reproducible proof output. Edge cases (migration, reviewer catch) are addressed.

## Closing Argument Quality

**Assessment:** earned

The closing argument references actual delivered artifacts: specific template section names, the test file with 6 named tests, and a reproducible proof command (`uv run -m unittest tests.test_obpi_template -v`). Minor note: the closing argument mentions "migration comments" but the template uses HTML comments for guidance rather than explicit migration notes — this is cosmetic, not functional.

## Summary

All four requirements are satisfied with clear evidence. The template enforces the closing argument structure in both lanes, and 6 validation tests ensure the contract holds. The OBPI delivers exactly what it promised.
