feat: Phase E E10 expert review example package schema -- ERP- CI-checkable review template with mock-only enforcement

docs/evidence/EXPERT_REVIEW_EXAMPLE_PACKAGE_GUIDE.md

@@ -0,0 +1,79 @@
+# ExpertReviewExamplePackage (ERP-) Guide
+
+## Purpose
+
+`ExpertReviewExamplePackage` is a self-contained example of a complete expert-review
+submission, using only toy/mock candidates. It exists so external reviewers and
+partners know exactly what to expect before receiving real data.
+
+**This schema is for examples only.** Real review submissions use
+`ReviewerQuestionnaire` (RVQ-) and `DomainReviewOutcome` (DRO-) schemas.
+
+## Schema Fields
+
+| Field | Type | Required | Description |
+|-------|------|----------|-------------|
+| `erp_id` | str | yes | Unique identifier, must start with `ERP-` |
+| `pipeline_version` | str | yes | Pipeline version this example targets |
+| `example_version` | str | yes | Version of this example (e.g. `v1.0`) |
+| `creation_date` | str | yes | ISO date (YYYY-MM-DD) |
+| `review_domain` | str | yes | Domain focus (controlled vocabulary) |
+| `mock_candidates` | list | yes | 1-10 toy candidate summaries |
+| `overall_clarity_rating` | int | yes | Likert 1-5 overall package clarity |
+| `synthesis_recommendation` | str | yes | Example recommendation (controlled vocabulary) |
+| `reviewer_comments` | str | yes | Example reviewer comments (≤500 chars) |
+| `dry_lab_only` | bool | yes | Must be True |
+| `is_example_data` | bool | yes | Must be True |
+| `example_use_case` | str | yes | What this example demonstrates |
+| `summary` | str | yes | Summary of the example (≤400 chars) |
+| `notes` | str | no | Additional context (≤300 chars) |
+
+## Mock Candidate Fields
+
+Each entry in `mock_candidates` must have:
+- `candidate_id`: must start with `MOCK-`, `TOY-`, `EXAMPLE-`, `DEMO-`, or `TEST-`
+- `sequence_length`: positive integer
+- `predicted_mic`: positive float (µg/mL)
+- `predicted_toxicity`: `low`, `moderate`, or `high`
+- `novelty_score`: float in [0.0, 1.0]
+- `include_in_example`: bool (at least one must be True)
+
+## Controlled Vocabularies
+
+**review_domain (6 values):**
+`antimicrobial_activity`, `toxicity_safety`, `novelty_assessment`,
+`simulation_quality`, `evidence_completeness`, `experimental_design`
+
+**synthesis_recommendation (4 values):**
+`proceed`, `proceed_with_conditions`, `defer`, `reject`
+
+## Validation Rules
+
+1. `erp_id` starts with `ERP-`
+2. `pipeline_version` non-empty
+3. `example_version` non-empty
+4. `creation_date` is ISO date (YYYY-MM-DD)
+5. `review_domain` in controlled vocabulary (6 values)
+6. `mock_candidates` has 1-10 entries
+7. Each candidate: ID prefix, sequence_length ≥1, mic >0, toxicity vocab, novelty [0,1]
+8. At least one candidate has `include_in_example=True`
+9. `overall_clarity_rating` in {1,2,3,4,5}
+10. `synthesis_recommendation` in controlled vocabulary (4 values)
+11. `reviewer_comments` non-empty and ≤500 chars
+12. `dry_lab_only` must be True
+13. `is_example_data` must be True
+14. `example_use_case` non-empty
+15. `summary` non-empty and ≤400 chars
+16. `notes` ≤300 chars
+
+## Warnings
+
+- `overall_clarity_rating ≤ 2`: verify the example package is complete
+- Excluded candidates: verify `include_in_example=False` is intentional
+- `notes` empty: consider documenting example context
+
+## Integration
+
+- Real review submissions: use `ReviewerQuestionnaire` (RVQ-)
+- Expert verdicts: use `DomainReviewOutcome` (DRO-)
+- This schema: onboarding, CI validation, partner documentation

docs/evidence/METRICS_CURRENT.md

@@ -9,6 +9,14 @@ Machine-readable snapshot: `outputs/metrics_snapshot.json` regenerated with `mak
 
 ## Changelog
 
+### v0.10.24 — Phase E E10: ExpertReviewExamplePackage schema
+- Added `ExpertReviewExamplePackage` (ERP-) schema
+- 14 fields: erp_id, pipeline_version, example_version, creation_date, review_domain, mock_candidates (1-10), overall_clarity_rating, synthesis_recommendation, reviewer_comments, dry_lab_only, is_example_data, example_use_case, summary, notes
+- 16 validation rules; 3 warnings; 63 tests
+- BASELINE 6107→6170
+- CLI: openamp-foundry expert-review-example-package-check
+- Closes Phase E E10 — CI-checkable example package that cannot leak real candidates
+
 ### v0.10.23 — Phase G G8: SyntheticBoundaryAuditRecord schema
 - Added `SyntheticBoundaryAuditRecord` (SBR-) schema
 - 14 fields: sbr_id, pipeline_version, batch_id, audit_date, evidence_source, total_candidates_checked, total_violations, violation_rate, blocked_upgrades, max_proposed_ladder_level, policy_enforced, enforcement_outcome, summary, notes

docs/research/NEXT_100_PR_MAP.md

@@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ Make qualified external review easier and safer.
 | E7 | Add packet validator CLI. | Review readiness becomes testable. | C/D |
 | E8 | Add release-summary generator that strips restricted fields. | Safer public summaries. | D |
 | E9 | Add domain review outcome schema (complete). | Structured expert verdict on a PEP with controlled taxonomy of domains and outcomes; closes ESC→RVQ→DRO review chain. | B/C |
-| E10 | Add expert-review example with mock/toy candidates only. | Safe demonstration. | B/C |
+| E10 | Add expert-review example with mock/toy candidates only (complete). | ERP- schema: 14 fields, 16 validation rules, mock candidate ID prefix enforcement (MOCK-/TOY-/EXAMPLE-/DEMO-/TEST-), is_example_data=True and dry_lab_only=True enforced; CI-checkable template cannot accidentally leak real candidates. | B/C |
 
 ## Phase F — Negative-result infrastructure
 

src/openamp_foundry/cli/commands/reports.py

@@ -3065,3 +3065,20 @@ def _run_synthetic_boundary_audit_record_check(args):
             print(f"ERROR: {e}", file=sys.stderr)
         sys.exit(1)
     print("OK: SyntheticBoundaryAuditRecord is valid.")
+
+
+def _run_expert_review_example_package_check(args):
+    """CLI handler for expert-review-example-package-check."""
+    import json, sys
+    from openamp_foundry.evidence.expert_review_example_package import validate_dict
+    data = json.load(open(args.input))
+    issues = validate_dict(data)
+    errors = [i for i in issues if not i.startswith("WARNING:")]
+    warnings = [i for i in issues if i.startswith("WARNING:")]
+    for w in warnings:
+        print(w)
+    if errors:
+        for e in errors:
+            print(f"ERROR: {e}", file=sys.stderr)
+        sys.exit(1)
+    print("OK: ExpertReviewExamplePackage is valid.")

src/openamp_foundry/cli/main.py

@@ -39,6 +39,7 @@
     _run_recalibration_decision_log_check,
     _run_recalibration_rejection_summary_check,
     _run_synthetic_boundary_audit_record_check,
+    _run_expert_review_example_package_check,
 )
 from openamp_foundry.cli.commands.gates import _run_gate_check, _run_release_gate_check
 from openamp_foundry.cli.commands.reports import _run_contribution_check
@@ -2543,6 +2544,10 @@ def build_parser() -> argparse.ArgumentParser:
     p_sbr.add_argument("input", help="Path to JSON file")
     p_sbr.set_defaults(func=_run_synthetic_boundary_audit_record_check)
 
+    p_erp = subparsers.add_parser("expert-review-example-package-check", help="Validate an ExpertReviewExamplePackage JSON")
+    p_erp.add_argument("input", help="Path to JSON file")
+    p_erp.set_defaults(func=_run_expert_review_example_package_check)
+
     # ── Selection rationale check (Phase K K1) ───────────────────────
     src2 = sub.add_parser(
         "selection-rationale-check",
@@ -2988,6 +2993,9 @@ def main(argv: list[str] | None = None) -> int:
     elif args.command == "recalibration-decision-log-check":
         _run_recalibration_decision_log_check(args)
 
+    elif args.command == "expert-review-example-package-check":
+        _run_expert_review_example_package_check(args)
+
     else:
         parser.error("unknown command")
     return 2