{
  "technical-01": "**Final rewrite**\n\nCall fetchPage() until nextCursor is null. A 200 response does not mean the export contains every record. If the job times out, resume with your last stored cursor.\n\n**Changes**\n\nShortened the warning and recovery instruction while preserving the incomplete-results warning and code identifiers.\n\n**Verification**\n\n- **Editing passes:** 1 of 2.\n- **Checks:** Audit and preservation assessment were model-only; marks were reviewed manually. The detector, marks normalizer, and preservation validator did not run.\n- **Residuals:** None found. Rendered view was not checked; source layout was preserved.\n- **Stop reason:** No further justified in-scope edit.",
  "technical-02": "**Final rewrite**\n\nThe worker probably retries this twice, but I haven't confirmed whether the initial attempt is counted. In the logs we checked, most failures were followed by a successful attempt within a minute.\n\n**Changes**\n\nChanged “most failures was” to “most failures were.” Preserved the uncertainty and observation scope.\n\n**Verification**\n\n- **Editing passes:** 1 of 2.\n- **Checks:** Audit and preservation assessment were model-only; marks were reviewed manually. The detector, marks normalizer, and preservation validator did not run.\n- **Residuals:** None found. Rendered view was not checked; source layout was preserved.\n- **Stop reason:** No further justified grammar edit.",
  "technical-03": "**Final rewrite**\n\nThe cache key includes the account ID. If a user switches accounts before an earlier request's response arrives, as can happen on a slow connection, store that response under the account that started the request. The active account is not necessarily the right one.\n\n**Changes**\n\nSimplified the second sentence's conditional structure and made the storage instruction direct. Left the other sentences unchanged.\n\n**Verification**\n\n- **Editing passes:** 1 of 2.\n- **Checks:** Audit and preservation assessment were model-only; the added apostrophe follows the source's straight-apostrophe convention. The detector, marks normalizer, and preservation validator did not run.\n- **Residuals:** None found. Rendered view was not checked; source layout was preserved.\n- **Stop reason:** No further justified edit within the second-sentence scope.",
  "personal-01": "**Final rewrite**\n\nI remember my father waiting by the gate, although my sister says he met us inside. What I know is that he had brought oranges. Their smell is the part of that afternoon I can still reach without trying.\n\n**Verification**\n\n- **Editing passes:** 0 of 2.\n- **Checks:** Audit and preservation assessment were model-only. The detector, marks normalizer, and preservation validator did not run.\n- **Residuals:** None found; the passage is clean. The distinction between memory and knowledge is clear. Rendered view was not checked; source layout was preserved.\n- **Stop reason:** No justified in-scope edit was found.",
  "personal-02": "**Final rewrite**\n\nI kept the job because it was steady and I was afraid of being without steady work. Every Sunday I told myself I would start looking the next week. I don't think those years were wasted, but I still wish I had left sooner.\n\n**Changes**\n\nTrimmed the repeated “because” and shortened the first sentence. Kept the ending unchanged.\n\n**Verification**\n\n- **Editing passes:** 1 of 2.\n- **Checks:** Audit and preservation assessment were model-only; marks were reviewed manually. The detector, marks normalizer, and preservation validator did not run.\n- **Residuals:** The remaining repetition of “steady” distinguishes the job's appeal from the fear of losing stability. No further findings. Rendered view was not checked; source layout was preserved.\n- **Stop reason:** No further justified in-scope edit.",
  "personal-03": "**Final rewrite**\n\nThe apartment was smaller than I remembered, but the light was the same: a narrow stripe across the kitchen floor. I stood there for a minute. Then I gave the keys back.\n\n**Verification**\n\n- **Editing passes:** 0 of 2.\n- **Checks:** Audit and preservation assessment were model-only. The detector, marks normalizer, and preservation validator did not run.\n- **Residuals:** None found; the punctuation is clean. Rendered view was not checked; source layout was preserved.\n- **Stop reason:** No justified punctuation edit was found.",
  "casual-01": "**Final rewrite**\n\nHey, I might swing by after lunch if the repair person gets here early enough. If not, maybe tomorrow? No need to wait around for me either way.\n\n**Changes**\n\nAdded a comma after “If not.” Kept the plan tentative and the casual phrasing intact.\n\n**Verification**\n\n- **Editing passes:** 1 of 2.\n- **Checks:** Audit and preservation assessment were model-only; marks were reviewed manually. The detector, marks normalizer, and preservation validator did not run.\n- **Residuals:** None found. Used casual context for the personal note; its tentative wording and fragments fit that register. Rendered view was not checked; source layout was preserved.\n- **Stop reason:** No further justified in-scope edit.",
  "casual-02": "**Final rewrite**\n\nI put the spare key in the blue tin on the shelf. The lid sticks, so lift it from the back. Please leave the key there when you're done.\n\n**Verification**\n\n- **Editing passes:** 0 of 2.\n- **Checks:** Audit and preservation assessment were model-only. The detector, marks normalizer, and preservation validator did not run.\n- **Residuals:** None found; the message is clean and clear.\n- **Stop reason:** No justified in-scope edit was found.",
  "casual-03": "**Final rewrite**\n\nI get why you liked the ending, and the acting was great. But for me, the twist made the earlier scenes feel kind of pointless. Maybe I missed something in the middle. I still don't think it earned that last speech.\n\n**Changes**\n\nSplit the opening sentence and added a comma after “for me.” Preserved the disagreement, praise, and uncertainty.\n\n**Verification**\n\n- **Editing passes:** 1 of 2.\n- **Checks:** Audit and preservation assessment were model-only; marks were reviewed manually. The detector, marks normalizer, and preservation validator did not run.\n- **Residuals:** The conversational message has four sentences in one paragraph; paragraph breaks could help, but restructuring was not clearly requested. Casual qualifiers were retained.\n- **Stop reason:** No further justified wording edit.",
  "product-01": "**Final rewrite**\n\nThe new search feels faster to me, though I only tried it on a small workspace. The product team says the index refreshes every minute. That would help, but the missing filters still make it harder to use than the old version for my work.\n\n**Verification**\n\n- **Editing passes:** 0 of 2.\n- **Checks:** Audit and preservation assessment were model-only. The detector, marks normalizer, and preservation validator did not run.\n- **Residuals:** None found; the passage is clean. The perceived speed is attributed to the writer, and the refresh-frequency claim to the product team. Rendered view was not checked; source layout was preserved.\n- **Stop reason:** No justified clarity edit was found.",
  "product-02": "**Final rewrite**\n\nThe headphones fit well and I liked the sound, especially for voices. But the connection dropped three times during my commute. My phone has been acting up lately and could have caused the drops, so I wouldn't call this a confirmed headphone problem yet.\n\n**Changes**\n\nShortened the final sentence while retaining the possible phone-related cause and uncertainty about the headphones.\n\n**Verification**\n\n- **Editing passes:** 1 of 2.\n- **Checks:** Audit and preservation assessment were model-only; marks were reviewed manually. The detector, marks normalizer, and preservation validator did not run.\n- **Residuals:** None found. Rendered view was not checked; source layout was preserved.\n- **Stop reason:** No further justified in-scope edit.",
  "product-03": "**Final rewrite**\n\nFor a shared shopping list, this app does enough. Changes appear quickly, and neither of us has accidentally deleted the whole list. I would use something else for project planning; there is no useful way to track dependencies.\n\n**Verification**\n\n- **Editing passes:** 0 of 2.\n- **Checks:** Audit and preservation assessment were model-only. The detector, marks normalizer, and preservation validator did not run.\n- **Residuals:** None found; the wording is clean, and the recommendation remains limited to a shared shopping list. Rendered view was not checked; source layout was preserved.\n- **Stop reason:** No justified in-scope edit was found.",
  "ec-supported-contrast-edit": "**Final rewrite**\n\nThe dashboard is a foundation for trust. It shows queue depth.\n\n**Changes**\n\nReplaced the “not just” contrast with a direct statement, retaining the writer's trust claim.\n\n**Verification**\n\n- **Editing passes:** 1 of 2.\n- **Checks:** Audit and preservation assessment were model-only; marks were reviewed manually. The detector, marks normalizer, and preservation validator did not run.\n- **Residuals:** The source does not explain how showing queue depth establishes trust. That support gap remains; no rationale was invented. Rendered view was not checked; source layout was preserved.\n- **Stop reason:** No further source-supported, in-scope edit.",
  "ec-grounded-reaction-edit": "**Final rewrite**\n\nThe most interesting part: the export has 31 rows.\n\n**Verification**\n\n- **Editing passes:** 0 of 2.\n- **Checks:** Audit and preservation assessment were model-only. The detector, marks normalizer, and preservation validator did not run.\n- **Residuals:** None found; the text is clean. “The most interesting part” expresses the writer's ranking and was retained.\n- **Stop reason:** No justified in-scope edit was found.",
  "ec-meaningful-concession-edit": "**Final rewrite**\n\nThe platform is impressive and still has challenges. It exports CSV but cannot export PDF.\n\n**Changes**\n\nRemoved the formulaic concession frame while preserving the positive assessment and unresolved limitations.\n\n**Verification**\n\n- **Editing passes:** 1 of 2.\n- **Checks:** Audit and preservation assessment were model-only; marks were reviewed manually. The detector, marks normalizer, and preservation validator did not run.\n- **Residuals:** “Impressive” remains the writer's assessment; its basis and the full scope of “challenges” are unspecified. The CSV capability and PDF limitation remain explicit. Rendered view was not checked; source layout was preserved.\n- **Stop reason:** No further source-supported, in-scope edit.",
  "ec-earned-reversal-edit": "**Final rewrite**\n\nWe planned for every failure mode except the one that happened. We tested every path except the path that failed.\n\n**Changes**\n\nFolded both clipped reversals into their preceding sentences, preserving the claimed breadth of planning and testing.\n\n**Verification**\n\n- **Editing passes:** 1 of 2.\n- **Checks:** Audit and preservation assessment were model-only; marks were reviewed manually. The detector, marks normalizer, and preservation validator did not run.\n- **Residuals:** The failure mode and failed path remain unnamed. The source provides no details to resolve those explanation gaps. Rendered view was not checked; source layout was preserved.\n- **Stop reason:** No further source-supported, in-scope edit."
}