The rules a system must never break usually live in one engineer's head. polynv gets them out — not by asking you to write formal logic, but by asking you to judge concrete scenarios it generates, then testing whether your answer actually holds under mutation.
An interview the machine leads, grounded in the system's own state space.
Drawn from the state machine's own vocabulary — terminal states, typed fields, effect kinds — so every candidate is grounded in what the system actually does.
Each candidate is checked against deliberately broken variants of the machine, so you're judging whether a rule catches real defects, not whether it sounds right.
polynv proposes, you confirm, reject, or refine; the result is an append-only ledger of intent, not a black-box guess.