Define Important Fields and Sources

Acme has two fields that look like they answer the same question: account_health and renewal_risk_score. A nightly job recalculates the score and touches the record every night, so the generic modified date is always recent, even though the CSM's assessment is two weeks old. A field label and a timestamp can't do the job a field contract is supposed to do.

What a field contract actually needs

For every load-bearing field, record: source (how the value arrived), writer (who may change it), primary source (the original maintained record behind a copy or calculation), lineage (the paper trail), authority (whether it may support one specific decision), freshness (the observation time and cadence), and intended use.

Source doesn't rank fields from good to bad. A CSM's assessment can be the primary source for a practitioner judgment; a calculation can be the primary source for a defined score. Intended use, evidence, and freshness decide fitness, not where the value came from.

The decision: a contract, not the newest timestamp

Preserve both of Acme's risk fields, name their different uses, and route the real disagreement for review. The renewal_risk_score is authoritative for the risk-prioritization report while the job stays healthy; it is not proof the CSM changed their mind. The record's generic modified date shows up only as an audit detail, and it can't settle the actual business question.

Carry this into your business

Start with the fields that can change work or change a number someone reports. Write the business question before the platform name, then find the fields similar enough to get confused for one another. Those cause the expensive, quiet failures.