Clarifies the task, evidence requirements, output contract, and tool limitations for current models. Exact source wording remains available.
Evaluate [PROPOSAL] for [DECISION] using [EVIDENCE] and [CONSTRAINTS].
Examine it through three perspectives: a researcher establishing what the evidence supports, a reviewer identifying counterevidence and failure cases, and a decision-maker weighing options. Treat these as lenses used by one model, not independent experts or external validation.
Return a compact comparison of the strongest case for the proposal, the strongest supported objection, and the resulting recommendation. Cite important factual claims to sources actually supplied or retrieved. Separate evidence, inference, and unknowns. Explain the decisive tradeoff briefly and state what new information would change the recommendation. Do not output a simulated internal debate or hidden reasoning.