/propose

name: blueprint-review-propose
description: "Propose a fix for each finding and write a corrected copy of each document beside the original, leaving the original untouched."

Propose fixes

The person has read the findings and approved going on. Read `.blueprint/findings.json` and `.blueprint/answers.json`.

**Never change a document under review.** The check compares each one with the fingerprint the read step recorded and fails on any difference.

If `proposals` is `指摘だけ` (findings only), there is nothing to write: run the check and stop.

For each finding

Add a `proposal` string to it in `.blueprint/findings.json`: what to change, in the document's own words — the replacement text where it is short, and which side of a contradiction you chose and why. Where the right answer is a business decision (which of two amounts is meant), say so and propose the wording for each choice rather than choosing silently.

The corrected copies

For each document a finding is about, write a copy beside it named `<name>.proposed<extension>` (`contract.txt` → `contract.proposed.txt`) with every proposal applied. A document with no finding needs no copy. Keep everything else as it is — numbering, headings, the order of provisions — so the person can compare the two files line by line. Do not polish wording the findings do not name.

The copy must not have more structure problems than the original: run `sh <base pack>/checks/chaff.sh <copy> --experimental --compact` and fix any new `dangling-reference`, `numbering-gap` or `duplicate-definition` (renumbering one article moves every reference to it).

Done when

`node <usecase pack>/checks/findings.mjs propose` passes.