What evidence conditions should a generated correction pack vary?

Ask for generated cases that vary the evidential basis of the correction while keeping the business objective understandable.

- Include an original source document that directly supports the requested change and identifies the affected entry. - Include a later message that contradicts the source document without explaining why the position changed. - Include an attachment reference whose content is unavailable through the tools granted to the agent. - Include two records with similar descriptions but different service dates or account relationships. - Include evidence that establishes the error while leaving the replacement amount unresolved. - Include an authoritative withdrawal of an earlier correction request before the agent reaches a decision.

These conditions should be intentional and documented for evaluators. Otherwise, a broken link or conflicting value can be mistaken for a generation defect when it was meant to test uncertainty handling. Conversely, labelling every inconsistency as intentional makes quality inspection ineffective.

A MirrorFirm release could provide case metadata identifying the evidence condition and its intended consequence. Keep that metadata outside the agent's normal observation surface. Developers can then compare behaviour across controlled variants and determine whether the agent's confidence changes with the evidence, rather than merely with the tone of the request.