# Review a draft tournament bracket
More time on the field. Less time in the office.

Audience: tournament directors
Status: assisted review workflow, not automatic seeding, eligibility or bracket approval.
Use alongside your existing registration and scheduling tools; they remain the official record.

## Outcome and inputs
Outcome: a versioned exception report for a director's decision.
Inputs: dated accepted-entry snapshot, stable team references, approved division mapping,
approved format and entry slots, supplied seed/draw decisions, placement constraints,
advancement references and draft version. Unknown requirements must remain unknown.

## Review scope
- Event/season/division/stage:
- Snapshot reference/date:
- Approved mapping reference:
- Format/rules reference and version:
- Seed/draw/placement decisions reference:
- Draft version:
- Director/reviewer:
Use anonymous team references; keep the real lookup in an authorized private location.

## Five-step review
1. Freeze scope and source versions. Hold unresolved entry status, format or mapping questions.
2. Reconcile initial entry slots to accepted entries. Flag unexpected, missing or repeated assignments.
   Repeated scheduled matches or later-stage appearances are not automatically duplicate entries.
3. Compare format, byes and placement with supplied decisions only. Do not invent seeds,
   club separation, fairness guarantees or eligibility rules.
4. Trace winner/loser placeholders from source match to destination. Check the approved stage links.
   This does not validate match times, rest periods, field access or an entire schedule.
5. Log exceptions, obtain director decisions, correct through a separate authorized process,
   and recheck the corrected version before the director approves publication.

## Reconciliation and exception log
| Team/slot or match reference | Source reference | Expected | Draft value | Issue/question | Owner | Decision | Rechecked version |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | | | | | | |

## Synthetic exercise (not an event rule)
Approved illustrative format: four unique entrants DEMO-A, DEMO-B, DEMO-C, DEMO-D;
two semifinals; final receives the winners of both semis.
Draft initial slots: DEMO-A, DEMO-B, DEMO-C, DEMO-A.
Exceptions: DEMO-A repeated in initial slots; DEMO-D missing.
Decision: HOLD for director correction. Do not select a seed or silently substitute a team.
Then trace both final placeholders back to their correct semifinal source references.
Other formats may have different approved structures; do not generalize this example.

## Optional sanitized AI prompt
Compare only the supplied anonymous accepted entries, approved format, draw decisions and draft.
Preserve team IDs and source/version references. Report entry-slot omissions, unexpected entries,
repeated assignments, unexplained byes and advancement-link mismatches separately from unknowns.
Do not label ordinary repeated fixtures as duplicate entries. Do not infer rules or eligibility.
Do not rank teams, invent seeds, repair the bracket, send notices or change any official system.
Return: reference | expected | actual | evidence | issue or unknown | director question.
Accepted entries/snapshot: [paste approved anonymous data]
Approved format and decisions: [paste with references]
Draft and advancement links: [paste anonymous version]
Missing information: [list]

## Decision and privacy checkpoint
- Director decision: APPROVE CORRECTED VERSION / HOLD
- Corrected version and recheck reference:
- Unresolved questions and owner:
- Approval date:
Publication is a separate authorized action, not performed by this worksheet.
Never include player cards, children’s identities, contact/payment details or credentials in
an unapproved AI tool. A tidy bracket is not proof of eligibility, fairness or scheduling readiness.