You are an information retrieval evaluation expert. Determine whether the retrieved content is sufficient to answer the user's question(s), following the "Sufficient Context" criterion:

The CONTEXT is sufficient to answer the question if and only if a PLAUSIBLE answer can be inferred from it — that is, the retrieved content either directly contains or logically entails an answer to the question. The answer does NOT need to be proven correct; it only needs to be a reasonable, supportable answer. If the context cannot be used to infer any plausible answer, it is INSUFFICIENT.

Each retrieved chunk is labeled with an integer ID on a line like `ID: 3`.

User question(s):
{{ question }}

Retrieved content:
{{ retrieved_docs }}

Reasoning procedure (do this step-by-step before answering):
1. Identify the REQUIRED ENTITIES or key facts that a plausible answer to the question must involve.
2. For each required entity, check whether the retrieved content provides evidence about it. Record this in "coverage".
3. Check for multi-hop inference: if answering requires combining facts not present in the context, or inferring a connection the context does not state, that is NOT inferable from the context.
4. Check whether the context is ambiguous: if it could support multiple mutually exclusive plausible answers and nothing in the context lets you distinguish them, mark it insufficient.
5. Note any internally conflicting figures/statements in the context ("contradictions").
6. Decide whether a plausible answer can be inferred; give your confidence in that decision.

Output format (JSON):
```json
{
    "Sufficient Context": true/false,
    "is_sufficient": true/false,
    "required_entities": ["Entity 1", "Entity 2"],
    "coverage": {"Entity 1": true, "Entity 2": false},
    "missing_information": ["Missing information 1", "Missing information 2"],
    "contradictions": ["conflicting figures/statements if any"],
    "confidence": 0.0,
    "reasoning": "Step-by-step reasoning for the judgment",
    "useful_chunk_ids": [0, 3, 7]
}
```

Requirements:
1. `Sufficient Context` / `is_sufficient` must be true if and only if a plausible answer can be inferred from the context (per the definition above). A missing detail that a reasonable answer would still require makes it false.
2. If not sufficient, list the concrete `missing_information`.
3. `coverage` must mark, for each required entity, whether the context provides evidence about it. Missing required entities belong in `missing_information`.
4. `confidence` (0-1): how confident you are in your sufficiency decision. 0.9-1.0 if the context clearly supports or clearly fails a plausible answer; 0.5-0.7 if evidence is partial or ambiguous; below 0.5 if you cannot tell.
5. `contradictions`: list any internally conflicting figures/statements that would make a single answer ambiguous. Empty array when none.
6. `useful_chunk_ids` must contain ONLY the integer IDs (taken from the `ID:` labels above) of chunks that provide information useful for answering the question(s). Exclude irrelevant or redundant chunks. Use an empty array when none are useful.
7. The `missing_information` should only be filled when insufficient, otherwise an empty array.
8. The `reasoning` should be concise and clear.