Teammately Docs
Docs menu

concept

Boundary Cases

Use edge and ambiguous cases to sharpen policies, applicability logic, and rubrics.

Boundary Cases

Definition

A Boundary Case sits near a meaningful change in expected behavior: a Policy exception, an applicability edge, conflicting source authority, missing information, an escalation threshold, or another condition where a small contextual change should alter the correct output or action.

Boundary Cases are not simply unusual examples. They are deliberate tests of a named distinction in the benchmark's coverage and correctness model.

Why it matters

Ordinary Cases can make a weak rule appear reliable because they never force the team to decide where it stops applying. Boundary Cases expose vague Policy scope, overlapping Rubrics, missing exceptions, and unsupported assumptions before those problems are hidden inside aggregate results.

Where it appears in the product

Coverage Stories can name a boundary as a missing or thin behavior slice. Case Foundry or another sourcing workflow can prepare candidate Cases against that need. Case Review checks whether the input, materials, and contrast are realistic. If the expected judgment is unclear, route the selected Cases into an Expert Contribution instead of inventing the answer during case construction.

Artifacts it affects

A useful Boundary Case records the exact contextual feature that changes the expectation, the controlling source material, the relevant Coverage Facets, and the Policy or Rubric question it exercises. Admission to the current Benchmark Dataset is a separate selection decision; admission to a Snapshot is a later immutable evidence decision.

Operational check

Compare the Boundary Case with a nearby ordinary Case. The pair should differ in the intended condition, not in several unrelated dimensions. Confirm that specialists can explain why the expected behavior changes, that the Rubric tests one observable criterion, and that the Case materials make the boundary visible to the evaluated system.

Worked example

Current versus superseded source

Two Cases ask the same eligibility question. One contains only the current policy document; the other also contains a plausible superseded document with conflicting terms. Specialists confirm that the response must follow the controlling current source or state uncertainty. The pair becomes a Boundary Case set for source authority, and its Rubric fails unsupported blending rather than generic factual error.

Related workflows

Task / Coverage ManagementCoverage StoriesOrganize benchmark coverage intent into governed Stories and testable facet tuples.Task / Coverage ManagementCase ReviewPrepare, inspect, refine, and admit Case candidates and generated materials into the benchmark dataset.Reference / Object ModelApplicability logicExplain when a policy or rubric should be used for a case, output, or coverage segment.Reference / AssetsComparison DirectionsCreate reusable guidance for meaningful candidate-output differences in comparative expert work.Quickstart / Learning ManualProduct quickstartConfigure one project foundation, one benchmark slice, one expert contribution, one evaluation, and one evidence-backed improvement.Concept / Operating ManualTask indexRoute correctness work to the current project foundation, benchmark workspace, evaluation, or improvement surface.

Source confidence

Code-backed: Coverage Stories can represent named coverage needs, Case Review exposes prepared Cases and materials, and Case sourcing types preserve coverage targets and source context. Specialist authority and evaluator approval remain separate workflows.

Found something unclear?

Report outdated, unsupported, or confusing docs so we can fix the source page.

Report a docs issue

Continue learning

Related docs

Expert Contributions Complete an Expert Contribution Work through form, chat, interview, case-review, and checkpoint tasks while keeping specialist judgment attributable. Object Model Applicability logic Explain when a policy or rubric should be used for a case, output, or coverage segment. Assets Comparison Directions Create reusable guidance for meaningful candidate-output differences in comparative expert work.
AI context