The HL7 implementation guide states the following:

The EHR may have more data than are relevant to the referenced eMeasure(s) and more data than are needed to compute the criteria. For instance, a patient who has been in the Intensive Care Unit undergoing continuous blood pressure monitoring will have reams of blood pressure observations. QDM-based QRDA adheres to a "smoking gun" philosophy where, at a minimum, the conclusive evidence needed to confirm that a criterion was met shall be included in the instance.
the very least, the QRDA document should include:
• For each data element in each referenced eMeasur, smoking gun data that offers confirmatory proof, where a patient has met the criterion. (For disjunctive criteria, e.g., where a criterion can be satisfied by either of two data elements, include smoking gun data for both data elements).
• Stratification variables, supplemental data elements, risk adjustment variables, and any other data element specified in the referenced eMeasure(s)

A quality program implementing QRDA will often provide prescriptive guidelines that define additional data, outside the smoking gun, that may or must be sent (such as the complete problem or medication list). Where such prescriptive guidelines exist, those take precedence over the more general guidance provided here. In other words, the "smoking gun" heuristic ensures that the minimum is present in the QRDA, and does not preclude inclusion of additional data.

We did not find any additional guidelines in the final rules. Is further guidance forthcoming? If so, when is it expected?

Can we assume “smoking gun” philosophy for what needs to be included in the QRDA I document and only include data elements that affect the outcome for a given measure? This is different than how Cypress is testing and validating EHRs so again that seems a bit misaligned.