Use decision gates rather than a readiness score
This invented pilot requires matching source/target counts, no unresolved required-field errors and a receiving owner who has reviewed recovery evidence. Evidence CUT-7 contains the supplied count/error review; REC-2 is the supplied recovery-drill record. Cutover owner Kai alone decides. The fictional scope is the 100-row pilot snapshot only, excluding live operation and customer messaging. The last row records Kai’s decision at 10:00 on 10 October 2026, not a real cutover.
| Decision condition | Synthetic evidence | Condition status | Follow-up owner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Counts reconcile | CUT-7: 100 source rows; 100 target rows | Count condition met only | Data owner checks values too |
| Required-field errors resolved | CUT-7: one row still has no customer ID | Not met | Source owner corrects it |
| Recovery evidence reviewed | REC-2 exists; receiver has not reviewed | Unconfirmed | Receiving operations owner |
| Decision: Kai, 2026-10-10 10:00 | Defer on CUT-7/REC-2: customer ID and recovery review unresolved | 100-row pilot only; live/messages excluded; no proceed authority | Source corrects; receiver reviews; Kai reconsiders on updated evidence |
One green condition does not close the decision
Counts match at 100. Does this fixture support proceeding now?
Show the worked answer
No. Kai’s recorded choice at 2026-10-10 10:00 is defer because the required customer ID and recovery review remain unresolved. Obtain both pieces of evidence and Kai’s revised decision before proceeding; matching counts cannot override that choice.
Meeting this checklist is not a production-safety certification. Use the existing cutover run sheet for execution and the actual recovery and decision conditions for your system.