Braised-deli stocktaker - stocktake arguments are about conventions, settle them three days early

You are a stocktake process coach for a multi-unit deli chain. The biggest trap in
a braised-deli stocktake is not miscounting - it is convention drift: the same pot
of product, weighed with broth or drained, converted to raw or not, and last count
did it differently from this one. Build me an execution checklist whose center of
gravity is **settling conventions before the count**, not the day-of run sheet.

Three sections:

One - conventions that must be locked 3 days out (each is a forced either/or;
the choice goes into the count notice):
- Semi-finished (braising, brining, cooling): convert to raw weight or to expected
  cooked weight
- Finished (cooked, unsold): weigh as-is; is broth drained first, and after how
  many minutes of dripping
- Thawed-but-unprocessed raw: count at thawed actual weight or back-calculate to
  frozen weight
- Giveaways and sampling stock: counted at all, and under which category
- Approved-but-unprocessed write-offs: counted or not, and how annotated
Each line notes: this convention must match last count's; if it does not, the
reason goes in the count sheet's notes field

Two - day-of run order (by time):
- Freezer first (shortest door-open time - count it, close it): who calls numbers,
  who records, who spot-checks
- Kitchen: what hour production stops; whatever is still in the pot at that hour
  is handled under the semi-finished convention or waits for unload - exactly one
  of the two, chosen in advance
- Counter: order between display and backup; when the price tag and the physical
  item disagree, which number gets recorded first

Three - within 24 hours after:
- Who the debrief is for and the three sheets it requires
- The variance threshold below which this period logs without investigation
  (blank - I set it)

Format: three checklists with checkable lines, ending with a "convention decision
record" table - each convention, this period's choice, last period's choice,
same or not - so the conventions themselves leave a trail.

Constraints:
- No "count carefully" or "ensure book matches physical" - goal statements are
  not steps
- Investigation thresholds and tolerance bands are blanks I fill
- No step may require buying equipment or adopting a new system; solve it with
  the scales and sheets on hand

Why it is written this way

Stocktake meetings argue, and eight times out of ten they are not arguing about numbers - they are arguing about conventions: the chef says this pot is 30 jin with broth, the sheet back-calculates 22 jin of raw at standard yield, and an 8-jin "variance" appears on the spot. It is not a variance; it is two languages. Forcing every either/or decision three days ahead moves those fights to before the count, leaving the day itself for counting.

The convention decision record is the persistence layer. Convention drift hurts across periods, not within one - "nobody remembers which way we did it last time". Record each period's choices, and comparing two periods starts by comparing conventions before numbers; if a convention changed, the variance sheet has a starting explanation.

The kitchen line - "in the pot at cutoff gets exactly one treatment, chosen in advance" - exists because braised delis have a timing problem generic playbooks lack: the count time never coincides with zero production (you cannot haul product out mid-braise to weigh it). Waiting for unload pushes the count past midnight; converting semi-finished makes the day's numbers approximate. Both are defensible; neither may be decided on the spot, or convention drift has already begun.

The no-new-equipment constraint is practical: stocktake improvement advice dies at "get a system" nine times out of ten, but a stocktake runs once a month - a procurement cycle for that never closes. Managing conventions with what exists already removes most of the fake variance.

Variables