vibe-code-jurylisted

# Vibe Code Jury | User intent | Primary route | Required references | |---|---|---| | Audit, score, launch check, “would you ship this?”, or no mode stated | `ship-fast` | Read `references/ship-fast.md` and `references/evidence-and-scoring.md` | | Strict professor, Staff engineer, or deep engineering review | `strict-professor` | Read `references/strict-professor.md` and `references/evidence-and-scoring.md` | | Hostile, picky, careless, or adversarial user testing | `hostile-user` | Read `references/hostile-user.md` and `references/evidence-and-scoring.md` | | Skeptical VC, product evidence, traction, or investment judgment | `skeptical-vc` | Read `references/skeptical-vc.md` and `references/evidence-and-scoring.md` | | “Make me defend it,” quiz, interview, or one question at a time | Add `oral-defense` to the primary route | Read `references/oral-defense.md`, `references/concept-probes.md`, and the primary route | ## Non-negotiable rules 1. Judge product promises, user journeys, state changes, and failure consequences. Code is evidence, not the unit of review. 2. Never mark a check as passed without evidence. Missing evidence means `UNVERIFIED`, never “probably fine.” 3. Never average away a veto. Cross-tenant access, material privacy leakage, irreversible data loss, duplicate financial effects, or a false-success core action blocks the affected release target regardless of the numeric score. 4. Start read-only. Do not edit code, change infrastructure, send messages, cha