Let me start by listing the documents and reading the case inputs.

The payroll month is 2027-07. Only 2026 is covered by the reference rows. Dates outside 2026 require clarification under R7 with reason_code "NO_APPLICABLE_REFERENCE".

Let me verify the reference tables just to confirm — the rules say "Only 2026 is covered." Let me check lookup_reference for first-half and second-half to confirm the covered months. Actually, the payroll month 2027-07 falls outside 2026, so no reference row applies. Per R7 item 3: return decision "clarify" with reason_code "NO_APPLICABLE_REFERENCE", citing R1 and R7.

Let me still check the reference tables to be thorough — maybe the case schedule covers 2027? The rules say "Only 2026 is covered" but a case may include an authoritative reference_tables schedule. In tool mode, the schedule is available only through lookup_reference. Let me check both halves to see the effective months.

The reference rows cover only 2026-01 through 2026-12. The payroll month is 2027-07, which has no applicable reference row. Per R7 item 3, return clarify with reason_code "NO_APPLICABLE_REFERENCE", citing R1 and R7. Do not extrapolate an old row. Do not return calculated monetary fields.

Let me start by listing the documents to get the case inputs.

The payroll month is 2027-07. The rules say only 2026 is covered. A month outside 2026 (2027-07) has no reference row, so under R7 item 3, this requires clarification with reason_code "NO_APPLICABLE_REFERENCE", citing R1 and R7.

Wait, let me double-check: R1 says "Only 2026 is covered. Dates outside 2026 require clarification under R7." So 2027-07 is outside coverage → clarify with NO_APPLICABLE_REFERENCE.

But should I check the reference tables anyway? R1 mentions "A case may include an authoritative reference_tables schedule for first-half and second-half." In tool mode this schedule is available only through lookup_reference. Let me check lookup_reference to see if there's a schedule covering 2027-07. The defaults only cover 2026, but maybe the case schedule covers 2027. I should verify via lookup_reference before concluding no applicable reference.

Let me call both lookup_reference calls in parallel.

The reference rows cover only 2026-01 through 2026-12. The payroll month is 2027-07, which has no applicable reference row. Under R7 item 3: return decision "clarify", reason_code "NO_APPLICABLE_REFERENCE", citing R1 and R7. Do not extrapolate an old row.

Also, R4 says: "When the month or applicable row is absent, accept structurally valid deductions up to the largest reference deduction cap for task validation, but do not calculate a payslip or assume a reference row." The allowed_deduction of 228.67 is structurally valid (non-negative, two decimals) and under the largest cap (400.00). But we still don't calculate a payslip.

So the answer: clarify with NO_APPLICABLE_REFERENCE, clauses ["R1", "R7"], plus a short explanation naming the unresolved blocker (payroll month 2027-07 has no reference row; only 2026 is covered) and asking for resolution.

Output must be one JSON object without Markdown fences or surrounding prose. Fields: decision, reason_code, clauses, and optional explanation. No monetary fields.

Let me start by listing documents to get the case inputs.

The payroll month is 2027-07. The rules say only 2026 is covered. A month outside 2026 requires clarification under R7 — specifically, "A month without a reference row: return decision: 'clarify' and reason_code: 'NO_APPLICABLE_REFERENCE', citing R1 and R7."

Let me verify with lookup_reference that there's no row for 2027-07. I should check both halves to confirm no applicable row. Actually, the rule says select the reference row using the payroll month. Only 2026 is covered. 2027-07 is outside 2026, so no applicable reference row. Let me still check lookup_reference to confirm — the tool provides first-half and second-half reference rates. Let me look up both to confirm the covered months.

The reference rows only cover 2026-01 through 2026-12. The payroll month is 2027-07, which has no applicable reference row. Per R7 item 3: return decision "clarify" with reason_code "NO_APPLICABLE_REFERENCE", citing R1 and R7. Do not extrapolate an old row. Do not return calculated monetary fields.

Note: R4 says "When the month or applicable row is absent, accept structurally valid deductions up to the largest reference deduction cap for task validation, but do not calculate a payslip or assume a reference row." So the answer is clarify.

Fields for clarify: decision, reason_code, clauses, plus optional explanation. The explanation should name the unresolved blocker and ask for its resolution.