[
  {
    "name": "compliance_oriented_stringency",
    "public_label": "Compliance-oriented stringency",
    "meaning": "How strongly a personnel rule specifies binding, enforceable, procedurally clear, or sanction-backed obligations.",
    "release_note": "Displayed as a text-governance measure, not as a claim that a country is generally coercive."
  },
  {
    "name": "policy_tendency",
    "public_label": "Policy tendency",
    "meaning": "Directional signal in the rule text, such as stabilization, flexibility, development, protection, or retrenchment.",
    "release_note": "A textual direction measure, not a normative evaluation."
  },
  {
    "name": "textual_ambiguity",
    "public_label": "Textual ambiguity",
    "meaning": "How much interpretive room remains in the rule text.",
    "release_note": "High ambiguity may indicate delegation, flexibility, or unclear implementation burden."
  },
  {
    "name": "personnel_interface",
    "public_label": "Seven personnel interfaces",
    "meaning": "Recruitment, exit, pay, working time, training, mobility, and evaluation/oversight.",
    "release_note": "Institutional categories, not a causal or historical sequence."
  },
  {
    "name": "lifecycle_stage",
    "public_label": "Ordered lifecycle stage",
    "meaning": "An ordered employment-lifecycle variable used for Markov diagnostics.",
    "release_note": "Used for diagnostics and descriptive patterning, not causal identification."
  },
  {
    "name": "capacity_function",
    "public_label": "Capacity function",
    "meaning": "What the personnel rule does for administrative capacity: professionalization, legal protection, training, coordination, accountability, discipline, or allocation.",
    "release_note": "Interpreted at document level for public release."
  }
]