@kontourai/survey 4.0.0 → 6.0.0

package/dist/src/review-workbench/review-queue-session.d.ts

@@ -94,15 +94,29 @@ export declare function keepActionDecision(item: ReviewItem, flaggedWrong: boole
 /**
  * The candidate a workbench decision applies to.
  *
- * Selection is by role, but the id this returns is what every caller makes
- * durable — a ReviewDecision's `candidateId`, a session event's, a result's, a
- * replay expectation. So the id has to name exactly one candidate before it
- * leaves here. Guarding the render path alone let the workbench emit an
- * undecidable decision through the export path and then present a different
+ * Selection is by role, so the role has to name exactly one candidate before a
+ * decision may trust it. Guarding the render path alone let the workbench emit
+ * an undecidable decision through the export path and then present a different
  * candidate's value against it; this is the shared selector all of those go
  * through, which is why the check belongs here rather than at each of them.
+ *
+ * A decision that would make one of several candidates in its role the trusted
+ * value is refused: picking the first would settle the conflict for the
+ * reviewer without showing it. A value-neutral decision (reject, could not
+ * confirm) on such an item selects none of them. It still returns the first
+ * candidate so in-process callers that need one candidate (rendering, the
+ * in-memory `ReviewWorkbenchResult`) have one, but that anchor is not recorded:
+ * {@link decisionCandidateId} is `undefined` for it, so the decision, its
+ * session events and the canonical projection name no candidate.
  */
 export declare function candidateForDecision(item: ReviewItem, decision: ReviewWorkbenchDecision): ReviewCandidate;
+/** Whether a decision on this item selects no candidate at all (see {@link candidateForDecision}). */
+export declare function decisionSelectsNoCandidate(item: ReviewItem, decision: ReviewWorkbenchDecision): boolean;
+/**
+ * The candidate id a decision records: the selected candidate's, or
+ * `undefined` when the decision selects no candidate.
+ */
+export declare function decisionCandidateId(item: ReviewItem, decision: ReviewWorkbenchDecision): string | undefined;
 /**
  * The value that should actually be applied for a decision: the reviewer's inline
  * edit when one was made for an accept-proposed decision, otherwise the selected

package/dist/src/review-workbench/review-queue-session.js

@@ -143,32 +143,65 @@ export function reviewSessionSummary(session) {
  * would invent a prior value, with provenance, that the source never had.
  */
 export function keepActionDecision(item, flaggedWrong) {
-    const hasRole = (role) => item.spec.candidates.some((candidate) => candidate.role === role);
-    if (flaggedWrong || !hasRole("current")) {
-        return hasRole("proposed") ? "reject-proposed" : undefined;
+    // Keeping the current value is recordable only when exactly one candidate is
+    // current (see candidateForDecision); rejecting the proposed values is
+    // recordable however many there are.
+    const count = (role) => item.spec.candidates.filter((candidate) => candidate.role === role).length;
+    if (flaggedWrong || count("current") === 0) {
+        return count("proposed") > 0 ? "reject-proposed" : undefined;
     }
-    return "keep-current";
+    return count("current") === 1 ? "keep-current" : undefined;
 }
+/**
+ * Decisions that make no candidate the trusted value: rejecting the proposed
+ * values and ending the round as could-not-confirm. On an item whose role holds
+ * several candidates (conflicting values for one claim) they select none of them.
+ */
+const VALUE_NEUTRAL_DECISIONS = new Set(["reject-proposed", "could-not-confirm"]);
 /**
  * The candidate a workbench decision applies to.
  *
- * Selection is by role, but the id this returns is what every caller makes
- * durable — a ReviewDecision's `candidateId`, a session event's, a result's, a
- * replay expectation. So the id has to name exactly one candidate before it
- * leaves here. Guarding the render path alone let the workbench emit an
- * undecidable decision through the export path and then present a different
+ * Selection is by role, so the role has to name exactly one candidate before a
+ * decision may trust it. Guarding the render path alone let the workbench emit
+ * an undecidable decision through the export path and then present a different
  * candidate's value against it; this is the shared selector all of those go
  * through, which is why the check belongs here rather than at each of them.
+ *
+ * A decision that would make one of several candidates in its role the trusted
+ * value is refused: picking the first would settle the conflict for the
+ * reviewer without showing it. A value-neutral decision (reject, could not
+ * confirm) on such an item selects none of them. It still returns the first
+ * candidate so in-process callers that need one candidate (rendering, the
+ * in-memory `ReviewWorkbenchResult`) have one, but that anchor is not recorded:
+ * {@link decisionCandidateId} is `undefined` for it, so the decision, its
+ * session events and the canonical projection name no candidate.
  */
 export function candidateForDecision(item, decision) {
     const definition = workbenchDecisionDefinitions[decision];
-    const candidate = item.spec.candidates.find((entry) => entry.role === definition.candidateRole);
+    const matches = item.spec.candidates.filter((entry) => entry.role === definition.candidateRole);
+    const candidate = matches[0];
     if (!candidate) {
         throw new Error(`ReviewItem ${item.metadata.name} has no ${definition.candidateRole} candidate.`);
     }
+    if (matches.length > 1 && !VALUE_NEUTRAL_DECISIONS.has(decision)) {
+        throw new Error(`ReviewItem ${item.metadata.name} has ${matches.length} ${definition.candidateRole} candidates; the ${decision} decision cannot choose between them.`);
+    }
     assertSoleCandidateId(item, candidate.id);
     return candidate;
 }
+/** Whether a decision on this item selects no candidate at all (see {@link candidateForDecision}). */
+export function decisionSelectsNoCandidate(item, decision) {
+    const role = workbenchDecisionDefinitions[decision].candidateRole;
+    return VALUE_NEUTRAL_DECISIONS.has(decision) && item.spec.candidates.filter((entry) => entry.role === role).length > 1;
+}
+/**
+ * The candidate id a decision records: the selected candidate's, or
+ * `undefined` when the decision selects no candidate.
+ */
+export function decisionCandidateId(item, decision) {
+    const candidate = candidateForDecision(item, decision);
+    return decisionSelectsNoCandidate(item, decision) ? undefined : candidate.id;
+}
 /**
  * The value that should actually be applied for a decision: the reviewer's inline
  * edit when one was made for an accept-proposed decision, otherwise the selected
@@ -254,7 +287,7 @@ export function buildReviewSessionEvents(session, sessionName = defaultReviewSes
         if (decision === "could-not-confirm" && !note?.trim()) {
             throw new Error(`ReviewItem ${item.metadata.name} could not confirm requires a non-empty reason.`);
         }
-        const candidate = candidateForDecision(item, decision);
+        const candidateId = decisionCandidateId(item, decision);
         const definition = workbenchDecisionDefinitions[decision];
         const reviewDecisionName = `${item.metadata.name}-${decision}`;
         // Carry the reviewer's inline edit in the event itself (accept-proposed
@@ -284,7 +317,7 @@ export function buildReviewSessionEvents(session, sessionName = defaultReviewSes
             occurredAt: session.reviewedAt,
             reviewItemName: item.metadata.name,
             reviewDecisionName,
-            candidateId: candidate.id,
+            ...(candidateId !== undefined ? { candidateId } : {}),
             status: definition.status,
             ...(decision === "could-not-confirm"
                 ? {
@@ -302,7 +335,7 @@ export function buildReviewSessionEvents(session, sessionName = defaultReviewSes
             occurredAt: session.reviewedAt,
             reviewItemName: item.metadata.name,
             reviewDecisionName,
-            candidateId: candidate.id,
+            ...(candidateId !== undefined ? { candidateId } : {}),
             status: definition.status,
             rationale: note,
             ...(decision === "could-not-confirm"

package/dist/src/review-workbench/review-session-replay.js

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-import { candidateForDecision, isClearedWorkbenchDecisionEvent, workbenchDecisionDefinitions, } from "./review-queue-session.js";
+import { candidateForDecision, decisionSelectsNoCandidate, isClearedWorkbenchDecisionEvent, workbenchDecisionDefinitions, } from "./review-queue-session.js";
 import { checkEditedValueForItem } from "./edited-value.js";
 export function validateReviewSessionEventsForSnapshot(snapshot, events) {
     const itemsByName = new Map(snapshot.items.map((item) => [item.metadata.name, item]));
@@ -56,17 +56,19 @@ export function validateReviewSessionEventsForSnapshot(snapshot, events) {
             else if (itemName && itemsByName.has(itemName)) {
                 const item = itemsByName.get(itemName);
                 const expectedCandidate = item ? candidateForDecision(item, decision) : undefined;
+                // A decision that selects no candidate must reference none.
+                const expectedCandidateId = item && !decisionSelectsNoCandidate(item, decision) ? expectedCandidate?.id : undefined;
                 const expectedStatus = workbenchDecisionDefinitions[decision].status;
                 const referencedCandidateExists = event.spec.candidateId
                     ? item?.spec.candidates.some((candidate) => candidate.id === event.spec.candidateId)
                     : false;
-                if (expectedCandidate && (!event.spec.candidateId || referencedCandidateExists) && event.spec.candidateId !== expectedCandidate.id) {
+                if (expectedCandidate && (!event.spec.candidateId || referencedCandidateExists) && event.spec.candidateId !== expectedCandidateId) {
                     issues.push({
                         ...eventRef,
                         code: "decision-candidate-mismatch",
                         reviewItemName: itemName,
                         candidateId: event.spec.candidateId,
-                        message: `ReviewSessionEvent ${event.metadata.name} decision ${decision} expects candidate ${expectedCandidate.id}, but references ${event.spec.candidateId ?? "no candidate"}.`,
+                        message: `ReviewSessionEvent ${event.metadata.name} decision ${decision} expects ${expectedCandidateId ? `candidate ${expectedCandidateId}` : "no candidate"}, but references ${event.spec.candidateId ?? "no candidate"}.`,
                     });
                 }
                 if (event.spec.status !== expectedStatus) {

package/dist/src/review-workbench/review-workbench-css.generated.js

@@ -246,7 +246,10 @@ export const REVIEW_WORKBENCH_CSS = `/* Bundled, scoped Survey Review Workbench
 .survey-workbench-embed .inspector-heading, .survey-workbench-embed .inspector-layout{ display: grid; grid-template-columns: minmax(15rem, .7fr) minmax(0, 1.3fr); gap: 1rem; }
 .survey-workbench-embed .inspector-heading h2{ margin: 0; }
 .survey-workbench-embed .inspector-posture{ display: flex; flex-direction: column; padding: .75rem; border-radius: var(--k-radius-sm); background: var(--k-positive-wash); }
-.survey-workbench-embed .inspector-posture.digest-mismatch, .survey-workbench-embed .inspector-posture.artifact-unavailable, .survey-workbench-embed .inspector-posture.excerpt-mismatch{ background: var(--k-negative-wash); color: var(--k-negative); border: 2px solid currentColor; }
+/* Caution first: an artifact failure on the same source must win the tie and stay negative. */
+.survey-workbench-embed .inspector-posture.extraction-incomplete{ background: var(--k-caution-wash); color: var(--k-caution); border: 2px solid currentColor; }
+.survey-workbench-embed .inspector-posture.digest-mismatch, .survey-workbench-embed .inspector-posture.artifact-unavailable, .survey-workbench-embed .inspector-posture.excerpt-mismatch, .survey-workbench-embed .inspector-posture.proposals-excluded{ background: var(--k-negative-wash); color: var(--k-negative); border: 2px solid currentColor; }
+.survey-workbench-embed .inspector-posture.extraction-failed{ background: var(--k-negative-wash); color: var(--k-negative); border: 2px solid currentColor; }
 .survey-workbench-embed .inspector-filters{ display: flex; flex-wrap: wrap; gap: .6rem; margin: 1rem 0; }
 .survey-workbench-embed .inspector-filters label{ display: grid; gap: .25rem; font-size: .75rem; color: var(--k-text-muted); }
 .survey-workbench-embed .inspector-filters select, .survey-workbench-embed .inspector-filters input{ color: var(--k-text); background: var(--k-sunken); border: 1px solid var(--k-line); padding: .4rem; }
@@ -832,6 +835,12 @@ export const REVIEW_WORKBENCH_CSS = `/* Bundled, scoped Survey Review Workbench
   font-size: 12px;
 }
 
+.survey-workbench-embed .excerpt-verification{
+  margin: 0;
+  font-size: 12px;
+  color: var(--k-muted);
+}
+
 /* decisions */
 
 /* The decision row is the point of the card, so it sits on its own line,

package/dist/src/review-workbench/review-workbench.css

@@ -243,7 +243,10 @@
 .survey-workbench-embed .inspector-heading, .survey-workbench-embed .inspector-layout{ display: grid; grid-template-columns: minmax(15rem, .7fr) minmax(0, 1.3fr); gap: 1rem; }
 .survey-workbench-embed .inspector-heading h2{ margin: 0; }
 .survey-workbench-embed .inspector-posture{ display: flex; flex-direction: column; padding: .75rem; border-radius: var(--k-radius-sm); background: var(--k-positive-wash); }
-.survey-workbench-embed .inspector-posture.digest-mismatch, .survey-workbench-embed .inspector-posture.artifact-unavailable, .survey-workbench-embed .inspector-posture.excerpt-mismatch{ background: var(--k-negative-wash); color: var(--k-negative); border: 2px solid currentColor; }
+/* Caution first: an artifact failure on the same source must win the tie and stay negative. */
+.survey-workbench-embed .inspector-posture.extraction-incomplete{ background: var(--k-caution-wash); color: var(--k-caution); border: 2px solid currentColor; }
+.survey-workbench-embed .inspector-posture.digest-mismatch, .survey-workbench-embed .inspector-posture.artifact-unavailable, .survey-workbench-embed .inspector-posture.excerpt-mismatch, .survey-workbench-embed .inspector-posture.proposals-excluded{ background: var(--k-negative-wash); color: var(--k-negative); border: 2px solid currentColor; }
+.survey-workbench-embed .inspector-posture.extraction-failed{ background: var(--k-negative-wash); color: var(--k-negative); border: 2px solid currentColor; }
 .survey-workbench-embed .inspector-filters{ display: flex; flex-wrap: wrap; gap: .6rem; margin: 1rem 0; }
 .survey-workbench-embed .inspector-filters label{ display: grid; gap: .25rem; font-size: .75rem; color: var(--k-text-muted); }
 .survey-workbench-embed .inspector-filters select, .survey-workbench-embed .inspector-filters input{ color: var(--k-text); background: var(--k-sunken); border: 1px solid var(--k-line); padding: .4rem; }
@@ -829,6 +832,12 @@
   font-size: 12px;
 }
 
+.survey-workbench-embed .excerpt-verification{
+  margin: 0;
+  font-size: 12px;
+  color: var(--k-muted);
+}
+
 /* decisions */
 
 /* The decision row is the point of the card, so it sits on its own line,

package/dist/src/review-workbench/review-workbench.d.ts

@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ import { type ReviewCandidate, type ReviewDecision, type ReviewItem, type Review
 export { reviewAuditRowKeys, type ReviewAuditRowKey } from "./audit-rows.js";
 export { assertReviewQueueAgainstExtractionImport, assertReviewQueueBinding, bindReviewQueue, hashReviewQueueSnapshot, UnattestedExtractionQueueError, UnattestedReviewQueueError, validateReviewQueueAgainstExtractionImport, validateReviewQueueBinding, type BindReviewQueueOptions, type ReviewQueueBinding, type ReviewQueueBindingIssue, type ReviewQueueBindingIssueCode, type ReviewQueueExtractionIssue, type ReviewQueueExtractionIssueCode, type ValidateReviewQueueBindingOptions, } from "./queue-binding.js";
 export { buildExtractionInspectorModel, exportExtractionInspector, filterExtractionInspectorCandidates, mountExtractionInspector, type ExtractionAlignmentState, type ArtifactUnavailableCode, type BuiltExtractionInspectorCandidate, type BuiltExtractionInspectorModel, type ExtractionInspectorCandidate, type ExtractionInspectorEntry, type ExtractionInspectorExportOptions, type ExtractionInspectorFilters, type ExtractionInspectorInput, type ExtractionInspectorMountOptions, type ExtractionInspectorModel, type ExtractionInspectorSource, type ResolvedExtractionArtifact, } from "./extraction-inspector.js";
-export { buildReviewSessionEvents, buildReviewSessionEvent, buildReviewSessionResource, candidateForDecision, keepActionDecision, currentReviewItem, currentReviewWorkbenchState, defaultReviewSessionName, deriveQueueRowStatus, initialReviewQueueSessionState, initialReviewWorkbenchState, nextUnresolvedItemName, replayReviewSessionEvents, reviewSessionSummary, reviewWorkbenchSessionStorageKey, selectedCandidateRole, workbenchDecisionDefinitions, type ReviewQueueRowStatus, type ReviewQueueSessionState, type ReviewSessionSummary, type ReviewWorkbenchDecision, type ReviewWorkbenchState, } from "./review-queue-session.js";
+export { buildReviewSessionEvents, buildReviewSessionEvent, buildReviewSessionResource, candidateForDecision, decisionCandidateId, decisionSelectsNoCandidate, keepActionDecision, currentReviewItem, currentReviewWorkbenchState, defaultReviewSessionName, deriveQueueRowStatus, initialReviewQueueSessionState, initialReviewWorkbenchState, nextUnresolvedItemName, replayReviewSessionEvents, reviewSessionSummary, reviewWorkbenchSessionStorageKey, selectedCandidateRole, workbenchDecisionDefinitions, type ReviewQueueRowStatus, type ReviewQueueSessionState, type ReviewSessionSummary, type ReviewWorkbenchDecision, type ReviewWorkbenchState, } from "./review-queue-session.js";
 export { buildReviewCandidatePresentation, buildReviewItemPresentation, buildReviewResultPresentation, humanizeIdentifier, type ReviewCandidatePresentation, type ReviewCandidatePresentationContext, type ReviewItemPresentation, type ReviewItemPresentationContext, type ReviewPresentationAdapter, type ReviewPresentationLink, type ReviewResultPresentation, type ReviewTracePresentationContext, type ReviewTraceRef, type ReviewValuePresentationContext, } from "./review-presentation.js";
 export { buildSurfaceProjectionPreview, type PreviewAuthorityTrace, type PreviewCandidateHistory, type PreviewClaim, type PreviewIntegrityPosture, type PreviewReviewEvent, type PreviewSourceAuthority, type PreviewSourceEvidence, type SurfaceProjectionPreview, } from "./review-surface-preview.js";
 export { reviewSessionReplayWarningsForSnapshot, validateReviewSessionEventsForSnapshot, type ReviewSessionReplayIssue, type ReviewSessionReplayIssueCode, type ReviewSessionReplayWarning, } from "./review-session-replay.js";
@@ -110,24 +110,31 @@ export interface ReviewQueueWindow {
 export interface BrowserReviewWorkbenchConfig {
     readonly startState?: ReviewQueueSessionState | ReviewWorkbenchState;
 }
+/**
+ * The in-process outcome of one workbench decision, derived from the session.
+ * For a decision that selects no candidate ({@link decisionSelectsNoCandidate}:
+ * reject-all or could-not-confirm on a conflict), every `selected*` and
+ * `effective*` field is absent, `unselectedCandidates` holds every candidate,
+ * and `reviewDecision.spec.candidateId` is absent.
+ */
 export interface ReviewWorkbenchResult {
     readonly reviewItemName: string;
     readonly decision: ReviewWorkbenchDecision;
-    readonly selectedCandidate: ReviewCandidate;
-    readonly selectedCandidateId: string;
+    readonly selectedCandidate?: ReviewCandidate;
+    readonly selectedCandidateId?: string;
     readonly selectedCandidateRole?: ReviewCandidate["role"];
     /** The selected candidate's original value, unaffected by any reviewer edit. Used
      *  for candidate-identity matching (see `matchingSelectedCandidate`); consumers who
      *  want the reviewer's edited value should read `effectiveValue` instead. */
-    readonly selectedValue: unknown;
-    readonly selectedDisplayValue: string;
+    readonly selectedValue?: unknown;
+    readonly selectedDisplayValue?: string;
     /** Reviewer-edited override captured for an accept-proposed decision, if the
      *  reviewer changed the proposed value before applying it. Additive/optional. */
     readonly editedValue?: unknown;
     /** The value that should actually be applied: `editedValue` when present (and the
      *  decision selects the proposed candidate), otherwise `selectedValue`. */
-    readonly effectiveValue: unknown;
-    readonly effectiveDisplayValue: string;
+    readonly effectiveValue?: unknown;
+    readonly effectiveDisplayValue?: string;
     readonly unselectedCandidates: readonly ReviewCandidate[];
     readonly reviewDecision: ReviewDecision;
     readonly status: ReviewDecision["spec"]["status"];

package/dist/src/review-workbench/review-workbench.js

@@ -1,18 +1,18 @@
 import { canonicalJson } from "./canonical.js";
 import { assertReviewResolutionConsistency } from "../producer-discipline.js";
-import { candidateForDecision, keepActionDecision, buildReviewSessionEvent, buildReviewSessionEvents, buildReviewSessionResource, currentReviewWorkbenchState, defaultReviewSessionName, effectiveValueForDecision, initialReviewQueueSessionState, replayReviewSessionEvents, reviewWorkbenchSessionStorageKey, workbenchDecisionDefinitions, } from "./review-queue-session.js";
+import { candidateForDecision, decisionCandidateId, decisionSelectsNoCandidate, keepActionDecision, buildReviewSessionEvent, buildReviewSessionEvents, buildReviewSessionResource, currentReviewWorkbenchState, defaultReviewSessionName, effectiveValueForDecision, initialReviewQueueSessionState, replayReviewSessionEvents, reviewWorkbenchSessionStorageKey, workbenchDecisionDefinitions, } from "./review-queue-session.js";
 import { reviewSessionReplayWarningsForSnapshot, validateReviewSessionEventsForSnapshot, } from "./review-session-replay.js";
 import { buildSurfaceProjectionPreview, formatValue, } from "./review-surface-preview.js";
 import { buildReviewCandidatePresentation, buildReviewItemPresentation, } from "./review-presentation.js";
 import { findSoleCandidateById, reviewResourceApiVersion, } from "../review-resource.js";
 import { validateAuthorizing, buildAuthorizedActionAuthorizing } from "../review-authorizing.js";
-import { humanizeIdentifier } from "./review-presentation.js";
+import { excludedProposalsSentence, humanizeIdentifier } from "./review-presentation.js";
 import { editedValueFromEditorText, isIsoCalendarDate, parsePlainDecimal } from "./edited-value.js";
 import { createAuditFactTrace, } from "./audit-rows.js";
 export { reviewAuditRowKeys } from "./audit-rows.js";
 export { assertReviewQueueAgainstExtractionImport, assertReviewQueueBinding, bindReviewQueue, hashReviewQueueSnapshot, UnattestedExtractionQueueError, UnattestedReviewQueueError, validateReviewQueueAgainstExtractionImport, validateReviewQueueBinding, } from "./queue-binding.js";
 export { buildExtractionInspectorModel, exportExtractionInspector, filterExtractionInspectorCandidates, mountExtractionInspector, } from "./extraction-inspector.js";
-export { buildReviewSessionEvents, buildReviewSessionEvent, buildReviewSessionResource, candidateForDecision, keepActionDecision, currentReviewItem, currentReviewWorkbenchState, defaultReviewSessionName, deriveQueueRowStatus, initialReviewQueueSessionState, initialReviewWorkbenchState, nextUnresolvedItemName, replayReviewSessionEvents, reviewSessionSummary, reviewWorkbenchSessionStorageKey, selectedCandidateRole, workbenchDecisionDefinitions, } from "./review-queue-session.js";
+export { buildReviewSessionEvents, buildReviewSessionEvent, buildReviewSessionResource, candidateForDecision, decisionCandidateId, decisionSelectsNoCandidate, keepActionDecision, currentReviewItem, currentReviewWorkbenchState, defaultReviewSessionName, deriveQueueRowStatus, initialReviewQueueSessionState, initialReviewWorkbenchState, nextUnresolvedItemName, replayReviewSessionEvents, reviewSessionSummary, reviewWorkbenchSessionStorageKey, selectedCandidateRole, workbenchDecisionDefinitions, } from "./review-queue-session.js";
 export { buildReviewCandidatePresentation, buildReviewItemPresentation, buildReviewResultPresentation, humanizeIdentifier, } from "./review-presentation.js";
 export { buildSurfaceProjectionPreview, } from "./review-surface-preview.js";
 export { reviewSessionReplayWarningsForSnapshot, validateReviewSessionEventsForSnapshot, } from "./review-session-replay.js";
@@ -27,11 +27,15 @@ export function buildReviewDecision(state) {
         throw new Error("Could not confirm requires a non-empty reason.");
     }
     const candidate = candidateForDecision(state.item, state.decision);
+    // A decision that selects no candidate (a value-neutral decision on a
+    // conflict) records no candidate id and no candidate's projection hints.
+    const selectsNone = decisionSelectsNoCandidate(state.item, state.decision);
     const projection = {
-        ...candidate.projection,
-        reviewOutcomeId: candidate.projection?.reviewOutcomeId
+        ...(selectsNone ? state.item.spec.projection : candidate.projection),
+        reviewOutcomeId: (selectsNone ? state.item.spec.projection : candidate.projection)?.reviewOutcomeId
             ?? `${state.item.metadata.name}:${state.decision}:review-outcome`,
     };
+    const candidateProjection = selectsNone ? undefined : candidate.projection;
     const authorizing = buildDecisionCardAuthorizing(state);
     const reviewDecision = {
         apiVersion: reviewResourceApiVersion,
@@ -43,7 +47,7 @@ export function buildReviewDecision(state) {
         },
         spec: {
             reviewItemName: state.item.metadata.name,
-            candidateId: candidate.id,
+            ...(selectsNone ? {} : { candidateId: candidate.id }),
             status: definition.status,
             ...(state.decision === "could-not-confirm"
                 ? {
@@ -64,7 +68,7 @@ export function buildReviewDecision(state) {
                 : {}),
         },
         status: {
-            ...(candidate.projection?.claimId ? { appliedToClaimIds: [candidate.projection.claimId] } : {}),
+            ...(candidateProjection?.claimId ? { appliedToClaimIds: [candidateProjection.claimId] } : {}),
         },
     };
     assertReviewResolutionConsistency(`ReviewDecision ${reviewDecision.metadata.name}`, {
@@ -125,8 +129,24 @@ function buildDecisionCardAuthorizing(state) {
  * followed by the selected decision label so the block is self-contained.
  */
 function decisionCardRenderedPrompt(state, targetLabel) {
+    // The card shows proposals excluded at import; the recorded prompt must say
+    // the reviewer was told about them.
+    const excluded = excludedProposalsSentence(buildReviewItemPresentation(state.item).excludedProposals);
+    const base = decisionCardBasePrompt(state, targetLabel);
+    return excluded ? `${base} ${excluded}` : base;
+}
+function decisionCardBasePrompt(state, targetLabel) {
     const currentCandidate = state.item.spec.candidates.find((c) => c.role === "current");
-    const proposedCandidate = state.item.spec.candidates.find((c) => c.role === "proposed");
+    const proposedCandidates = state.item.spec.candidates.filter((c) => c.role === "proposed");
+    // A conflict card lists every proposed value and offers reject-all or could
+    // not confirm; the prompt states the same, naming no single value.
+    if (proposedCandidates.length > 1) {
+        const decisionLabel = state.decision === "reject-proposed"
+            ? "Reject all values"
+            : state.decision ? workbenchDecisionDefinitions[state.decision].label : "";
+        return `For ${targetLabel}, ${proposedCandidates.length} different values were proposed: ${proposedCandidates.map((c) => formatValue(c.value)).join(", ")}. Selected decision: ${decisionLabel}.`;
+    }
+    const proposedCandidate = proposedCandidates[0];
     const currentValue = formatValue(currentCandidate?.value ?? "");
     const proposedValue = formatValue(proposedCandidate?.value ?? "");
     const decisionLabel = state.decision ? workbenchDecisionDefinitions[state.decision].label : "";
@@ -206,7 +226,9 @@ function duplicateTargetIssues(items) {
     return issues;
 }
 function mapReviewApplyResultToActions(input) {
-    if (input.result.decision === "could-not-confirm") {
+    // Could-not-confirm applies nothing, and neither does a decision that selects
+    // no candidate (rejecting every value of a conflict): there is no value to apply.
+    if (input.result.decision === "could-not-confirm" || input.result.selectedCandidateId === undefined) {
         return [];
     }
     const context = buildReviewApplyActionContext(input.result, input.itemByName, input.issues);
@@ -256,6 +278,8 @@ function buildReviewApplyActionContext(result, itemByName, issues) {
     };
 }
 function matchingSelectedCandidate(item, result) {
+    if (result.selectedCandidateId === undefined)
+        return undefined;
     const candidate = findSoleCandidateById(item, result.selectedCandidateId);
     return candidate
         && candidate.role === result.selectedCandidateRole
@@ -280,6 +304,16 @@ export function buildReviewWorkbenchResultsFromSession(session) {
         if (!reviewDecision) {
             return [];
         }
+        if (decisionSelectsNoCandidate(item, decision)) {
+            return [{
+                    reviewItemName: item.metadata.name,
+                    decision,
+                    unselectedCandidates: [...item.spec.candidates],
+                    reviewDecision,
+                    status: reviewDecision.spec.status,
+                    rationale: reviewDecision.spec.rationale,
+                }];
+        }
         const selectedCandidate = candidateForDecision(item, decision);
         const editedValue = decision === "accept-proposed"
             ? session.editedValuesByItemName?.[item.metadata.name]
@@ -491,13 +525,13 @@ function fieldCardState(item, decision) {
  * {@link keepActionDecision}). Saying "Kept — flagged wrong" there would claim a
  * distinction the record does not hold, so the chip states only what happened.
  */
-function chipLabel(state, hasCurrentValue) {
+function chipLabel(state, hasCurrentValue, conflictingValues) {
     switch (state) {
         case "accepted": return "Accepted";
-        case "kept": return hasCurrentValue ? "Kept current" : "Left unset";
-        case "rejected": return hasCurrentValue ? "Kept — flagged wrong" : "Left unset";
+        case "kept": return hasCurrentValue ? "Kept current" : conflictingValues ? "All values rejected" : "Left unset";
+        case "rejected": return hasCurrentValue ? "Kept — flagged wrong" : conflictingValues ? "All values rejected" : "Left unset";
         case "could-not-confirm": return "Could not confirm";
-        default: return "Needs review";
+        default: return conflictingValues ? `Conflict: ${conflictingValues} values` : "Needs review";
     }
 }
 const DEFAULT_REVIEW_QUEUE_PAGE_SIZE = 50;
@@ -618,11 +652,16 @@ function renderFieldCard(item, session, presentationAdapter) {
     const state = fieldCardState(item, decision);
     const decided = decision !== undefined;
     const current = item.spec.candidates.find((candidate) => candidate.role === "current");
-    const proposed = item.spec.candidates.find((candidate) => candidate.role === "proposed");
+    const proposedCandidates = item.spec.candidates.filter((candidate) => candidate.role === "proposed");
+    // Several proposed values for one claim are a conflict. A control names a
+    // role, not a value, so none may make one of them the trusted value; the
+    // reviewer can still reject them all or end the round as could-not-confirm.
+    const conflict = proposedCandidates.length > 1;
+    const proposed = proposedCandidates.length === 1 ? proposedCandidates[0] : undefined;
     const presentation = buildReviewItemPresentation(item, presentationAdapter);
     const hasCurrentValue = current !== undefined && !isEmptyValue(current.value);
     const kind = hasCurrentValue ? "Update" : "New";
-    const keepLabel = hasCurrentValue ? "Keep current" : "Leave unset";
+    const keepLabel = hasCurrentValue ? "Keep current" : conflict ? "Reject all values" : "Leave unset";
     // Only render controls whose decision this item can actually record. Every
     // decision resolves to a candidate role, so a control routed at a role the
     // item does not carry cannot emit anything — it used to throw mid-click and
@@ -653,12 +692,15 @@ function renderFieldCard(item, session, presentationAdapter) {
         <div class="frow1">
           <span class="fname">${escapeHtml(presentation.targetLabel)}</span>
           <span class="fkind">${kind}</span>
-          <span class="chip ${state} push" data-testid="field-chip">${chipLabel(state, hasCurrentValue)}</span>
+          <span class="chip ${state} push" data-testid="field-chip">${chipLabel(state, hasCurrentValue, conflict ? proposedCandidates.length : undefined)}</span>
         </div>
         ${proposed
         ? renderDiffRow(item, current, proposed, presentation.targetLabel, decided, effectiveProposedText, currentPresentationText)
-        : "<p class=\"field-value\">No proposed value is available for this field.</p>"}
+        : proposedCandidates.length > 1
+            ? renderConflictingProposals(item, proposedCandidates, presentationAdapter, presentation.targetLabel)
+            : "<p class=\"field-value\">No proposed value is available for this field.</p>"}
         ${proposed ? renderProvenanceRow(item, proposed, presentationAdapter) : ""}
+        ${renderExtractionImportNotes(presentation)}
         <div class="decide">
           ${keepDecision === undefined ? "" : `<button class="btn keep" type="button" data-testid="keep-current" data-item-name="${escapeHtml(item.metadata.name)}">${keepLabel}</button>`}
           ${proposed ? `<button class="btn use" type="button" data-testid="use-proposed" data-item-name="${escapeHtml(item.metadata.name)}">Use proposed</button>
@@ -667,6 +709,7 @@ function renderFieldCard(item, session, presentationAdapter) {
             Suggestion was wrong
           </label>
           <button class="btn unconfirmed" type="button" data-testid="could-not-confirm" data-item-name="${escapeHtml(item.metadata.name)}">Could not confirm</button>` : ""}
+          ${conflict ? `<button class="btn unconfirmed" type="button" data-testid="could-not-confirm" data-item-name="${escapeHtml(item.metadata.name)}">Could not confirm</button>` : ""}
         </div>
         <!--
           A control's precondition message belongs where the control is. The
@@ -677,7 +720,7 @@ function renderFieldCard(item, session, presentationAdapter) {
         -->
         <span class="derr" data-testid="decision-error" role="alert" hidden></span>
         <div class="decided">
-          <span class="chip ${state}" data-testid="decided-chip">${chipLabel(state, hasCurrentValue)}</span>
+          <span class="chip ${state}" data-testid="decided-chip">${chipLabel(state, hasCurrentValue, conflict ? proposedCandidates.length : undefined)}</span>
           <button class="undo" type="button" data-testid="undo-decision" data-item-name="${escapeHtml(item.metadata.name)}">Change</button>
         </div>
         ${renderAuditDetails(item, current, proposed, session, presentationAdapter)}
@@ -685,6 +728,24 @@ function renderFieldCard(item, session, presentationAdapter) {
     </section>
   `;
 }
+/**
+ * The card body for an item whose candidate set holds several proposed values.
+ * Lists every value with its excerpt; the workbench records a decision against
+ * a role, so it cannot pick one of them, and says what the reviewer can do.
+ */
+function renderConflictingProposals(item, candidates, presentationAdapter, targetLabel) {
+    const values = candidates.map((candidate) => {
+        const text = buildReviewCandidatePresentation(item, candidate, presentationAdapter, targetLabel).valueText;
+        const excerpt = candidate.locator?.excerpt;
+        return `<li data-testid="conflicting-value"><span class="vtext">${escapeHtml(text)}</span>${excerpt ? ` <q>${escapeHtml(excerpt)}</q>` : ""}</li>`;
+    }).join("");
+    return `
+    <div class="field-value" data-testid="conflicting-proposals">
+      <p>${candidates.length} different values were proposed for this field. This queue cannot choose one of them yet: reject them all, or mark the field Could not confirm with a reason.</p>
+      <ul>${values}</ul>
+    </div>
+  `;
+}
 /**
  * Renders the Current → Proposed diff row. The proposed side is editable
  * (via {@link renderProposedValueEditor}) until the field has a decision.
@@ -871,6 +932,35 @@ function renderProvenanceRow(item, proposed, presentationAdapter) {
     </div>
   `;
 }
+/**
+ * What an envelope import says about this field's evidence: whether its
+ * excerpts were checked against the prepared source text, and any rival
+ * proposals the import left out because their excerpt was not at their span.
+ * Such a proposal is unverifiable, not disproven, so the reviewer sees it
+ * before accepting the value that remained. Empty for items from other
+ * producers.
+ */
+function renderExtractionImportNotes(presentation) {
+    const { excerptVerification: verification, excludedProposals: excluded } = presentation;
+    if (verification === undefined && excluded.length === 0)
+        return "";
+    const excludedHtml = excluded.length === 0 ? "" : `
+      <div class="noprov" data-testid="excluded-proposals" role="note">
+        ${WARNING_SVG}
+        <span class="tag">${excluded.length} excluded</span>
+        <span>${excluded.length === 1 ? "Another proposal for this field was" : `${excluded.length} other proposals for this field were`} left out because the source text at the cited span is not the excerpt:
+          ${excluded.map((entry) => `<span data-testid="excluded-proposal" data-proposal-index="${escapeHtml(String(entry.proposalIndex))}"><q>${escapeHtml(entry.valueText)}</q> (proposal ${escapeHtml(String(entry.proposalIndex))}, ${escapeHtml(entry.locator)})</span>`).join(", ")}.
+          Unverifiable is not disproven: check the source before deciding.</span>
+      </div>`;
+    const verificationHtml = verification === undefined ? "" : `
+      <p class="excerpt-verification" data-testid="excerpt-verification" data-verified="${verification === "verified" ? "true" : "false"}">${verification === "verified"
+        ? "Excerpts checked against the prepared source text at import."
+        : "Excerpts not checked against the prepared source text at import."}</p>`;
+    return `
+    <div class="prov import-notes">${excludedHtml}${verificationHtml}
+    </div>
+  `;
+}
 function renderConfidenceMeter(confidence) {
     const clamped = Math.max(0, Math.min(1, confidence));
     const pct = Math.round(clamped * 100);
@@ -927,6 +1017,7 @@ function renderAuditDetails(item, current, proposed, session, presentationAdapte
           ${proposed?.extraction.model ? fieldItem("model", "Model", proposed.extraction.model) : ""}
           ${proposed ? placementItem(trace, { of: proposed.id, property: "extraction.extractor" }, "extractor", "Extractor", proposed.extraction.extractor ?? "unknown") : ""}
           ${proposed ? fieldItem("extracted-at", "Extracted at", proposed.extraction.extractedAt ?? "unknown") : ""}
+          ${buildReviewItemPresentation(item, presentationAdapter).excludedProposals.map((entry) => fieldItem("excluded-proposal", `Excluded proposal ${entry.proposalIndex}`, `${entry.valueText} at ${entry.locator}: excerpt not at the cited span`)).join("")}
         </dl>
         ${preview
         ? `<div class="preview-section-grid">${renderSurfacePreviewSections(preview, trace)}</div><p class="preview-disclaimer preview-disclaimer-footer">${escapeHtml(preview.postureDisclaimer)}</p>`
@@ -1165,7 +1256,7 @@ function createReviewWorkbenchController(root, startState, options) {
         const session = sessionForEvent;
         const item = itemName ? session.items.find((entry) => entry.metadata.name === itemName) : undefined;
         const decision = itemName ? session.decisionsByItemName[itemName] : undefined;
-        const candidate = item && decision ? candidateForDecision(item, decision) : undefined;
+        const candidateId = item && decision ? decisionCandidateId(item, decision) : undefined;
         const definition = decision ? workbenchDecisionDefinitions[decision] : undefined;
         const note = itemName ? session.notesByItemName[itemName] : undefined;
         // Carry the reviewer's inline edit in the event (accept-proposed only), so
@@ -1188,7 +1279,7 @@ function createReviewWorkbenchController(root, startState, options) {
             occurredAt: session.reviewedAt,
             reviewItemName: itemName,
             reviewDecisionName: item && decision ? `${item.metadata.name}-${decision}` : undefined,
-            candidateId: candidate?.id,
+            candidateId,
             status: definition?.status,
             ...(decision === "could-not-confirm"
                 ? {

package/dist/src/review-workbench/review-workbench.standalone.css

@@ -38,7 +38,10 @@
 .inspector-heading, .inspector-layout { display: grid; grid-template-columns: minmax(15rem, .7fr) minmax(0, 1.3fr); gap: 1rem; }
 .inspector-heading h2 { margin: 0; }
 .inspector-posture { display: flex; flex-direction: column; padding: .75rem; border-radius: var(--k-radius-sm); background: var(--k-positive-wash); }
-.inspector-posture.digest-mismatch, .inspector-posture.artifact-unavailable, .inspector-posture.excerpt-mismatch { background: var(--k-negative-wash); color: var(--k-negative); border: 2px solid currentColor; }
+/* Caution first: an artifact failure on the same source must win the tie and stay negative. */
+.inspector-posture.extraction-incomplete { background: var(--k-caution-wash); color: var(--k-caution); border: 2px solid currentColor; }
+.inspector-posture.digest-mismatch, .inspector-posture.artifact-unavailable, .inspector-posture.excerpt-mismatch, .inspector-posture.proposals-excluded { background: var(--k-negative-wash); color: var(--k-negative); border: 2px solid currentColor; }
+.inspector-posture.extraction-failed { background: var(--k-negative-wash); color: var(--k-negative); border: 2px solid currentColor; }
 .inspector-filters { display: flex; flex-wrap: wrap; gap: .6rem; margin: 1rem 0; }
 .inspector-filters label { display: grid; gap: .25rem; font-size: .75rem; color: var(--k-text-muted); }
 .inspector-filters select, .inspector-filters input { color: var(--k-text); background: var(--k-sunken); border: 1px solid var(--k-line); padding: .4rem; }
@@ -624,6 +627,12 @@ h1, h2, h3, p {
   font-size: 12px;
 }
 
+.excerpt-verification {
+  margin: 0;
+  font-size: 12px;
+  color: var(--k-muted);
+}
+
 /* decisions */
 
 /* The decision row is the point of the card, so it sits on its own line,

package/dist/src/surface-reviewed-extraction.js

@@ -1,4 +1,8 @@
 export function toSurfaceReviewedExtractionImport(record) {
+    const unreported = record.spec.envelope.result.proposals.findIndex((proposal) => proposal.confidence === undefined);
+    if (unreported !== -1) {
+        throw new Error(`Surface's reviewed-extraction profile requires a proposer confidence on every proposal; proposal ${unreported} of ${record.metadata.name} reports none.`);
+    }
     return record;
 }
 export function toSurfaceReviewedExtractionItem(item) {