> ## Documentation Index
> Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://docs.omnia-voice.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.

# Judge assists

> Suggest, scan, auto-improve, the prompt lab, and split drafting — everything amplifies your grades; nothing grades on its own authority.

Assists get a judge from draft to calibrated faster, never one-shot
automation. Every assist amplifies grades you already made, and **you stay
the judge**: nothing here grades anything on its own authority, and adopting
any suggestion stays a human decision.

* **Suggest from critiques** (`POST /v1/criteria/suggest`) clusters your
  failure critiques (10+ required) into at most 5 draft judges: your
  failure taxonomy, written for you, reviewed by you. A draft whose name
  already exists is skipped, never overwritten.
* **Scan traffic** (`POST /v1/criteria/{id}/scan`) runs a judge over recent
  ungraded traffic and queues suspected failures for one-click
  confirm/dismiss in the Review queue. Confirming creates a real grade, so
  the calibration set grows itself; dismissing means it never resurfaces.
  A segment- or tag-scoped judge scans only its own population.
* **Auto-improve** (`POST /v1/criteria/{id}/auto_improve`) mines the last
  [calibration](/judges/calibration)'s *tune-half* disagreements, rewrites
  the judge prompt, and creates a **successor draft** with its calibration
  queued; the report half stays untouched, so the next measurement is
  honest. It requires a holdout-scale calibration (80+ judged grades). In the
  dashboard, Auto-improve runs a budgeted multi-round loop; **over the API
  each call is exactly one iteration**. Deliberate, so every round of spend
  is a consented act. Adopting a successor stays a human decision.
* **Preview an edit** (dashboard: the judge's *prompt lab*): before a prompt
  edit lands, the candidate is judged against your existing grades (tune half
  only at holdout scale; the measured half stays untouched) and shown next
  to the live prompt **on the same rows**, with CIs. Saving still voids the
  calibration (a projection is a forecast, not a measurement), but the save
  records which forecast it adopted, and every preview is counted: iterate
  against the same grades too often and the report says so.
* **Draft a split** (dashboard: offered when calibration shows the
  *bundled-criterion signature*: agreement that differs sharply across
  strata): two child judges are drafted from your rulebook and critiques, and
  projected against your existing compound grades. Only the **conjunction**
  (fails if either child fails) is scored; a compound fail can't say *which*
  half failed, so per-child κ is deliberately not invented. Instead you get
  the fail decomposition (caught by A alone / B alone / both / **neither**),
  and creation is blocked while any fail escapes both children.

All of these spend the wallet like any judging, and none of them grades
anything on its own authority.