Now: The holders predicate treats the word 'Shift' in 'Night Shift NFT holders' as evidence of $SHIFT token holders. A plan that excludes token holders is marked Covered, and the explanation incorrectly says both holder groups share the allocation.

Change to: Match the $SHIFT/SHIFT token-holder phrase independently from the Night Shift NFT-holder phrase, and require both in the shared 40% allocation. Otherwise return Add with 'Include $SHIFT holders alongside Night Shift NFT holders in the shared 40% fee allocation.'

Why: The brief explicitly assigns the holders' 40% to $SHIFT holders and NFT holders, and the checker promises to identify what needs fixing.

Now: The rule checks that each expected allocation appears but ignores additional recipients and does not sum the declared allocation rows. Adding a fifth 20% allocation leaves Fee allocation Covered.

Change to: Validate the complete fee distribution, including additional or duplicate allocations, before returning Covered. Return Fix when the total differs from 100%, name the extra allocation, and give 'Remove the additional treasury allocation; the fee must total 100% as 40% holders, 20% developer, 20% marketing, and 20% burning.' Keep pot-level 5% and winner-level 95% outside that sum.

Why: The requested 40/20/20/20 split exhausts the fee. A checker that approves 120% does not identify the numerical error the visitor needs to fix.

Now: Payout detection excludes 'no', 'zero', and 'without', but accepts a sentence that explicitly says the 5% fee is not deducted. Its report then claims the fee is stated as collected.

Change to: Apply negation handling to the matched fee statement before accepting it, including 'not', 'never', and 'won’t'. Show Fix for an explicit denial of the required pot fee and retain the existing replacement 'A 5% fee is deducted from the total pot.'

Why: The checker promises a clear fix against the target 5% fee; an explicit denial of that fee must not satisfy the rule.