[
  {
    "id": "diag-01",
    "input": "We've seen a spike in complaints from our warehouse team this month compared to last month.",
    "expectedPrimaryTypes": ["unexplained_change"],
    "expectedReasoningModes": ["establish_baseline", "identify_difference"],
    "shouldIdentify": ["complaints", "warehouse", "baseline comparison"],
    "shouldNotInfer": ["quality issue", "staff turnover", "training gap"],
    "description": "Baseline comparison — change without context. Should NOT jump to conclusions about quality or staff issues."
  },
  {
    "id": "diag-02",
    "input": "Some customers reported that the new app crashes when uploading photos.",
    "expectedPrimaryTypes": ["observed_problem"],
    "expectedReasoningModes": ["identify_difference", "establish_baseline"],
    "shouldIdentify": ["app crashes", "photo upload", "some customers"],
    "shouldNotInfer": ["all users affected", "server-side bug", "Android only"],
    "description": "Subset modifier — 'some customers' means not universal. Should distinguish from blanket claims."
  },
  {
    "id": "diag-03",
    "input": "Sales fell by 15% last month after we increased prices, but the CFO says revenue is still up 2%.",
    "expectedPrimaryTypes": ["contradiction"],
    "expectedReasoningModes": ["investigate_contradiction", "establish_baseline"],
    "shouldIdentify": ["sales decline", "price increase", "revenue increase", "CFO report"],
    "shouldNotInfer": ["price was set too high", "competitors gained market share", "revenue data is wrong"],
    "description": "Apparent contradiction — sales down but revenue up after price change. Distinguishes volume vs value."
  },
  {
    "id": "diag-04",
    "input": "We need to launch a marketplace app in Southeast Asia to capture the gap our competitors are exploiting.",
    "expectedPrimaryTypes": ["decision_request"],
    "expectedReasoningModes": ["decision_support", "identify_missing_information"],
    "shouldIdentify": ["marketplace app", "Southeast Asia", "competitor gap"],
    "shouldNotInfer": ["this will definitely succeed", "we have the resources", "competitors are struggling"],
    "description": "Decision request — forward-looking, needs missing info identification."
  },
  {
    "id": "diag-05",
    "input": "Our production line changed suppliers three months ago but still delivers the same defect rate as before.",
    "expectedPrimaryTypes": ["unexplained_change"],
    "expectedReasoningModes": ["establish_baseline", "identify_difference"],
    "shouldIdentify": ["supplier change", "three months ago", "same defect rate"],
    "shouldNotInfer": ["new supplier is worse", "old supplier was better", "quality process is broken"],
    "description": "Unexpected continuity — changed context but no outcome change."
  },
  {
    "id": "diag-06",
    "input": "From 45% to 62%, the completion rate for our onboarding flow improved significantly.",
    "expectedPrimaryTypes": ["unexplained_change"],
    "expectedReasoningModes": ["establish_baseline", "validate_measurement"],
    "shouldIdentify": ["completion rate", "45%", "62%", "onboarding"],
    "shouldNotInfer": ["all improvements are due to the redesign", "the old flow was bad", "users prefer the new design"],
    "description": "Quantified improvement — needs context about measurement period and baseline conditions."
  },
  {
    "id": "diag-07",
    "input": "A user claimed that our pricing model is too complex for small businesses.",
    "expectedPrimaryTypes": ["reported_claim"],
    "expectedReasoningModes": ["validate_claim", "identify_difference"],
    "shouldIdentify": ["pricing complexity", "small business", "user claim"],
    "shouldNotInfer": ["the pricing is actually complex", "other small businesses agree", "we should simplify pricing"],
    "description": "Single reported claim — needs validation, not acceptance as fact."
  },
  {
    "id": "diag-08",
    "input": "I used the phrase 'philosophical difference' in a meeting and my colleague said it meant nothing. Is that fair?",
    "expectedPrimaryTypes": ["ambiguous_statement"],
    "expectedReasoningModes": ["clarify_meaning"],
    "shouldIdentify": ["philosophical", "ambiguous", "meaning clarification"],
    "shouldNotInfer": ["the phrase was wrong", "the colleague is hostile", "we should avoid philosophical language"],
    "description": "Meta-test — self-referential ambiguous statement. Should trigger clarification mode."
  },
  {
    "id": "diag-09",
    "input": "After the deployment last week, our complaint volume tripled to 47 cases per day.",
    "expectedPrimaryTypes": ["causal_claim"],
    "expectedReasoningModes": ["investigate_contradiction", "establish_baseline"],
    "shouldIdentify": ["deployment", "complaint volume increase", "tripled", "47 cases"],
    "shouldNotInfer": ["the deployment caused the complaints", "the bug report was insufficient", "rollback is needed"],
    "description": "Post-event spike — presents correlation as potential causation. Must resist jumping to causal conclusion."
  },
  {
    "id": "diag-10",
    "input": "Some complaints involve production issues, but others say the delivery team is slow.",
    "expectedPrimaryTypes": ["observed_problem"],
    "expectedReasoningModes": ["identify_difference", "decompose_aggregate"],
    "shouldIdentify": ["production issues", "delivery speed", "complaint types"],
    "shouldNotInfer": ["production is worse than delivery", "the delivery team needs training", "both teams are underperforming equally"],
    "description": "Paired with diag-01 — distinguishes subset complaints from aggregate claims."
  }
]