{
  "isSynthetic": true,
  "version": "1.0.0",
  "scenario": "A fictional editorial team planning a public page about its corrections policy. No performance result, customer data, or live search evidence is used.",
  "values": {
    "page_topic": "How a small publication handles article corrections",
    "primary_reader": "Managing editor at a small independent publication",
    "reader_task": "Decide what a public corrections policy should explain and assign the people responsible for reviewing reports.",
    "page_goal": "Produce a clear policy page that readers can use to report a material error and editors can follow consistently.",
    "search_intent": "Learn how to structure an editorial corrections policy",
    "primary_query": "editorial corrections policy",
    "scope_boundary": "Cover reporting, review, visible updates, and ownership. Exclude legal advice, publisher-specific obligations, and promises that every request will result in a change.",
    "key_claims": "Claim 1: explain which reports enter editorial review.\nClaim 2: explain how a material correction is recorded.\nClaim 3: distinguish corrections from routine style edits.",
    "source_plan": "Use the publication’s current internal review procedure as first-party evidence. Use current public policies from relevant publishers only for comparison, not as copied language or universal rules.",
    "original_contribution": "A decision table that routes factual errors, broken links, attribution concerns, and style edits to the appropriate review owner.",
    "first_hand_value": "The editorial lead can document the team’s actual report intake and revision process. No invented incident history or performance data.",
    "author_review_owner": "Draft: staff editor. Evidence review and final approval: managing editor.",
    "citation_plan": "Place first-party policy evidence beside process claims. Mark comparison notes as examples and retain an unresolved marker until each external source is checked.",
    "structure_notes": "Start with how to report an issue, then explain review, possible outcomes, visible correction notes, and questions the policy cannot decide.",
    "title_meta_plan": "Title: Editorial Corrections Policy | Synthetic Planning Example. Summary: See how the fictional team receives, reviews, and records correction requests.",
    "internal_link_plan": "Link from the publication’s About and Contact pages. Link out to the current article and contact route only when those URLs exist.",
    "technical_publish_checks": "Confirm one H1, visible contact instructions, crawlable internal links, intended canonical URL, index controls, and mobile-readable policy text.",
    "limitations_corrections": "This synthetic plan is not legal advice and does not establish factual completeness. The finished page should name a monitored correction contact and review owner."
  }
}