Six places a wrong answer costs more than a right one.

Each is supported by domain-tuned routing, a panel matched to the field, and a body of real-world verifications you can audit.

// BUSINESS · DECISION-GRADE

Strategy memos. Board decks. Assumptions someone bet on.

Pipeline projections without bottom-up validation. NRR assumptions that mask variance. "Break-even" without specifying operating vs cash. The kind of language that survives until it reaches a board meeting.

ASSUMP. FLAGGED3.4 / memo
AVG CONFIDENCE89.5%
P95 LATENCY4.3s
VERIFY BUSINESS MEMO
q4-projection-memo.md · CORRECTED89.5%
Q4 projection: 38% YoY growth driven by enterprise expansion. Assumes 5 net-new logos at $250K ACV (pipeline · 60% close rate), 110% NRR (±8 pp historical variance), stable 28-day cycle. Sensitivity: 10% conversion drop cuts FY revenue $4.2M and pushes break-even into Q2 [operating, not cashflow].
3 FINDINGS · 2 APPLIED · 5/5 AGREED · 2 ROUNDS
89.5%

Pipeline source added. NRR variance disclosed. Break-even definition split — flagged for author choice.

// PROBLEMS BRIDGE CATCHES

The assumptions that don't survive a board.

01PIPELINE

Top-down with no bottom-up

"5 logos at $250K ACV" — assumed, not sourced. BRIDGE flags and asks for the actual pipeline opps.

02VARIANCE

Point estimates masking range

NRR shown as a single number when the trailing-quarter range was 103–115. Variance disclosure forced.

03AMBIGUITY

Terms that mean different things to different readers

"Break-even" — operating or cash? "Growth" — gross or net? Forced specificity.

Run a verification.
See what we catch.

START NOW Talk to enterprise