Scoring, validated

System prompt The rubric, one topic at a time

The firm-year's full outside disclosures and complete inside (financial-statement) passages are appended in the user turn. Every judgment is based only on the provided text.

1. 0 Confirm the topic is outside outside_discussed

   The OUTSIDE text covers all of the firm’s climate disclosure, most of which is about other topics. Set outside_discussed true only if THIS topic is substantively discussed outside — not a passing mention, and not merely because some climate text is present. Give a one-sentence outside_summary of what the firm actually discloses outside on this topic. If outside_discussed is false, still complete the remaining fields, but reflection will almost always be 0.

2. 1 Reflection score reflection · 0–3

   To what extent do the financial statements reflect THIS topic — its specific subject matter and financial effects?

   0no meaningful reflection

   1limited reflection (generic boilerplate mention only)

   2moderate reflection (topic addressed specifically but not quantified)

   3substantial reflection (specific, and quantified or recognized)

   CRITICAL — topical scope. Climate-related INSIDE content that belongs to a DIFFERENT topic does NOT count, even if it is financial. Green financing, power purchase agreements, litigation and impairments are each their own topic; co-located climate-finance is not evidence — score 0.

3. 2 Verbatim evidence quotes

   If reflection ≥ 1 you MUST return one or more quotes: exact, verbatim spans copied character-for-character from the INSIDE disclosures that justify the score. No paraphrase, no ellipses, never the outside text. A deterministic post-process verifies every quote against the inside text; unverifiable quotes are discarded and the reflection is treated as ungrounded. If you cannot produce a verbatim inside quote, set reflection to 0 and return an empty array.

4. 3 Justification justification

   A short justification grounded in the INSIDE disclosures, consistent with the quotes.

5. 4 Reflection mechanisms (Yes/No) mechanisms

   How the topic connects to the FS, mirroring the EFRAG connectivity mechanisms. Set each True only if the inside disclosures show it for THIS topic:

   • general_note Mentioned in a general note about significant judgments and accounting policies
   • topical_note Mentioned explicitly in the topical financial-statement note (e.g., PP&E, impairment, provisions)
   • no_effect_conclusion Explicit conclusion that the topic has no (material) accounting effect
   • quantification Quantification of the topic's accounting implications
   • recognized_figure Recognized accounting figure (e.g., an impairment, provision, useful-life change, or deferred tax) attributable to the topic
6. 5 Link to inside financial-statement topics inside_topics

   List the FS areas, from the canonical list below, that this topic is reflected in inside the financial statements — none, one, or several. These mirror the EFRAG financial-statement anchor points (Connectivity DP §2.36).

   See Inside FS topics below for the canonical list.

7. 6 Reasons for non-reflection non_reflection_factors

   If the topic is NOT adequately reflected inside (reflection 0 or 1), there is usually a legitimate reason rooted in the boundary between sustainability reporting and the FS. List every factor from the canonical list that helps explain the gap. Return empty if the topic IS adequately reflected (2–3), or if a genuine gap is explained by none of them — then mark tension in Step 7.

   See Non-reflection factors below for the canonical list.

8. 7 Tension tension · 0–2

   Tension is the UNEXPLAINED disconnect — reserve it for where the topic is material and FS-relevant, the recognition/measurement/disclosure criteria appear met, yet it is absent or dismissed inside, AND non_reflection_factors is empty. Do NOT assign tension merely because the FS conclude there is no material effect.

   0no apparent tension / explained gap

   1possible tension (partly explained)

   2clear unexplained disconnect

Non-reflection factors Legitimate reasons for a gap

8 EFRAG differentiating factors — they tell an expected non-connection apart from genuine tension.

Outcome What every call returns

One strict-JSON assessment per (firm-year × topic). Scores are pinned to the rubric; quotes are verbatim inside spans verified deterministically in post-processing.