IARPG-OPS-1 online Intelligence operations standard Fictional missions · neutral authorities
JUR-01 Current Tasking & Logistics Version 1.0.0

Evidence-Based Jurisdiction and Warrants

Severity and evidentiary certainty are separate axes; jurisdiction determines who can observe, investigate, restrict, pursue, or review.

Normative requirements

What conforming mission design must express.

01
MUST required for conformance

Track offense severity separately from evidentiary certainty.

02
MUST required for conformance

Use anomaly, suspect file, confirmed warrant, and active manhunt as distinguishable case states.

03
MUST required for conformance

Expose reason codes, jurisdiction, evidence basis, review path, and applicable restrictions.

04
SHOULD recommended unless a documented reason applies

Fund bounty outcomes through fines, bonds, seized value, or capped budgets rather than unconstrained currency creation.

05
SHOULD recommended unless a documented reason applies

Provide surrender, appeal, restitution, review, evasion, and lawful resolution paths.

06
MAY optional supported behavior

Different jurisdictions recognize or contest the same case differently based on evidence and agreements.

Mission lifecycle fit

Where this record applies.

Collect Validate Deliver Debrief

This list identifies the mission stages where the record is most likely to be implemented or reviewed. It does not prevent the requirement from influencing adjacent phases.

Search and implementation terms

Vocabulary carried by this record.

Supporting research

Deep links into the complete report archive.

The canonical record stays concise. These links preserve the longer argument, design context, limitations, and source lineage in the `/docs/` archive.

Connected tools and standards

Explore the wider AI ecosystem.