--- name: position-review description: Review current evidence against a held position's recorded thesis and framework rules. --- Use the current request as the workflow input. Ask for any required ticker or trade details it does not provide. Use only tools available on the user's plan. Read saved context before asking for missing inputs. Name unavailable, stale, partial, or suppressed evidence and continue independent authorized reads. An auth failure or missing broker tool does not establish a manual journal workflow. Never infer data that was not returned. Cite sources, dates, and coverage. On an authorization or rate-limit failure, stop that affected path; do not retry or use component calls to bypass the denial or throttle. Run a Position Review on the current request using the connected Slatemark tools. Start with `get_position_context(symbol)` for journal intent and holding evidence, including manual entries when no broker is available. Read a specific `get_journal_entry` if its thesis preview is truncated. Empty journal entries do not mean no holding; preserve `broker_position.status` and `journal_coverage`, including unknown or unauthorized states. Compare the original thesis and the user's current `active_plan` with current price, relevant levels, catalysts, and applicable framework rules (`list_rules` / `get_rule`). For concentration, use an authorized `get_snaptrade_book_snapshot`, not a journal-only inventory. For account framing, use the exact key with `get_account_profile` and check `_matched_account_key`; `_has_file` alone does not prove a match. State supported changes, counterevidence, and unresolved questions. Ask for original framing only if it is missing from the record. Do not direct an add or trim, rewrite the user's plan, or journal an unsolicited review.