dsh-policy-brief-draft

Boundary: this plugin checks a 政策专报要素核对表 for what a brief can be held to mechanically — that each section states its point, that a point has supporting evidence, that the evidence cites a source, that the data date parses and is not in the future, that the figures are fresh enough under your window, that a recommendation names who would implement it, that the brief names its title and recipient, and that section numbers are unique. It does not decide whether a point is right, whether the evidence is sufficient, whether a recommendation is feasible, whether the data is reliable, or whether the brief should be submitted. Those are judgements about research quality and decision value.

⚠️ What this plugin can and cannot see

It reads a checklist, not the sources or the data. So it can only check that a source is cited — never that the source exists or that the figures match it. PB-003 says so in its own note, and the README's troubleshooting section repeats it: a fabricated citation will pass, because verifying sources is a different job.

《党政机关公文处理工作条例》(中办发〔2012〕14号) was obtained and read verbatim, and rules/evidence/clause-verification.md records which articles were quoted — article 8(10) (a report serves to brief a superior body), article 19 (drafting: 「分析问题实事求是」「所提政策措施和办法切实可行」「观点鲜明」) and article 20(4), which lists 「引文等是否准确」 as a review point before issuance.

The rule excerpt fields still say "本次未取得", and every rule remains warn or info. The regulation governs how a document is drafted and issued; this plugin checks whether a brief's outline records its points, evidence, sources and recommendations. Calling a blank column a direct breach of 「观点鲜明」 would dress a register gap up as a regulatory one — the over-claim this family exists to avoid. Half the rules rest on your own editorial conventions in any case.

The data-freshness window ships unset. How stale is too stale is your editorial rule — a quick brief may demand last month's figures while an annual analysis legitimately cites the year's data — so PB-005's maxDays starts at 0 and the rule reports itself in skipped rather than inventing a number. A finding there means "older than the window you set", never "unusable"; citing older data is sometimes right, and the fix is to say why in the remark.

Compatibility

Surface	Status
Harness	Peer range >=0.1.2-rc.1 <0.2.0 || >=0.2.0-0 <0.3.0 — verified to accept both 0.2.0-rc.2 and 0.2.1-alpha.1. engines.dsh is deliberately not declared: it has no reader and cannot reject a host
Node	`^22.19.0
Platforms	All (plain ESM; no native code, no network, no model call)
Tool mode	Works in native, ptc and both; for a long brief use ptc

What it does

Registers the policy_brief_draft tool. It reads one brief outline — the document header plus one row per section — applies a versioned rule pack, and returns a report.

Rule	Check	Severity	Basis kind
PB-001	each section states its point	warn	principle
PB-002	each point has supporting evidence	warn	principle
PB-003	the evidence cites a source	warn	principle
PB-004	the data date parses and is not in the future	warn	principle
PB-005	the data is fresh enough under your window (off by default)	info	local
PB-006	a recommendation names its implementer	warn	principle
PB-007	the brief names its title and recipient	warn	principle
PB-008	section numbers are unique	warn	principle

Install

dsh plugin --profile <name> add dsh-policy-brief-draft
dsh --profile <name> --dump-config | grep 'dsh-policy-brief-draft'

Configuration

Key	Type	Default	Description
rulesFile	string	rules/policy-brief-draft.yaml	Rule-pack path, relative to the package root
disabledRules	string[]	[]	Rule ids to stop running; each appears in skipped
onlyRules	string[]	[]	Run only these rule ids; empty runs every rule
skipNotes	string	""	Note appended to every skipped reason
timeoutMs	number	120000	Cooperative tool timeout budget

Rule-level parameters worth knowing:

• PB-005 maxDays — your freshness window in days. 0 means the rule does not run.
• PB-006 conditionField / requiredFields — what triggers the implementer requirement; the recommendation column by default. Sections that analyse without recommending are not asked for one.
• PB-007 fields — the header fields that must be present; title and recipient by default. Add classification if your briefs carry a security marking.

Material format

The tool accepts JSON or YAML:

title: 某某领域投资形势分析专报
topic: 投资形势
recipient: 某某部门
draftedAt: 2026-03-12
classification: 内部
rows:
  - { 序号: '1', 章节: 一、现状,
      核心观点: 本领域投资增速连续三个季度回落，结构性分化明显,
      支撑依据: 全国固定资产投资统计月报（2026 年 2 月）显示本领域投资同比增长 3.1%,
      出处: 国家统计局月度数据，2026 年 3 月发布, 数据截止日期: 2026-02-28,
      风险提示: 月度数据存在季节因素，需结合同比口径判断 }

Column names are matched case-insensitively and ignoring spaces, underscores and hyphens; the outline's own column names are kept, so a finding names the column it read. Dates may be 2026-02-28 or 2026-02-28 09:30.

Rule sources

Rule data lives in rules/policy-brief-draft.yaml. The pack's header states the citation gap in full, and each rule's note repeats the part that matters for that rule. The load-time guard that normally enforces "an excerpt must be a real quotation of at least eight characters" cannot tell a quotation from a description — so this pack leans on the header, the per-rule notes and a test that asserts every excerpt admits the gap.

Troubleshooting

• PB-003 passes a source I know is invented. It cannot check that: it verifies a source is cited, not that it exists or says what the brief claims.
• PB-005 reports itself as skipped. No freshness window is set. How stale is too stale is your editorial rule, and the plugin will not invent one.
• PB-005 fires on data I deliberately cited. Older data is sometimes the right data. Either widen maxDays or record the reason in the remark — the finding is about the window, not about the data.
• PB-006 does not fire on an analysis section. That is deliberate: the implementer is required only when a recommendation is actually made.
• PB-004 fires on a date in the future. Either the data date or the drafting date is wrong; a brief cannot rest on figures that do not exist yet.
• The plugin installs but the tool never appears. Check that main resolves to lib/index.mjs and that pnpm run build produced it; a wrong main makes the loader skip the entry silently.
• dsh plugin add refuses the package as incompatible. The peer range covers 0.1.x and 0.2.x; if your runtime sits outside it, grant an explicit exemption: dsh plugin --profile <name> allow-version dsh-policy-brief-draft@0.1.0 --dsh-version <runtime> --accept-risk
• check reports manifest-peers as failed. The static checker compares against a hard-coded peer range that predates the 0.2 line. The runtime enforces peer compatibility at install time, so the declared range is the correct one; this is a known upstream issue in dsh-plugin-dev.

Development

pnpm install
pnpm run typecheck   # tsc --noEmit
pnpm test            # vitest, the shared table-plugin suite plus paired fixtures
pnpm run build       # tsdown -> lib/index.mjs + lib/index.d.mts
node ../scripts/sync-shared.mjs dsh-policy-brief-draft   # refresh src/shared from ../_shared

The plugin is data-only: src/model.ts declares the table shape, the shared kit supplies the reader and the check engine, and the rule pack declares every check.

License

Apache License 2.0 © 2026 dsh-policy-brief-draft contributors.