From exception to an authorized, auditable disposition. Every claim is sourced, permissions are rechecked, and a person records the decision.
Build the evidence set
Case EX-0142 example · service exception
One source failed.
The draft waits until every connected source loads, so nothing is missing silently.
Retry sourceOne source didn’t load. Retry, never a silent gap.
Sources used
Only sources you can open in the original system appear.
1 source hidden.
You don’t have access in the source system. Title and content are not shown.
Left out: 2 records, with the reason for each.
Continue to draftA hidden source shows no title and no content.
Review the draft
3 claims, each linked to its sources example
v1 AI draft · kept→v2 your edits
Low confidence.
Two sources give different times. Check before you submit.
I checked this claim against the sources
Confirm and continueLow confidence needs a human tick. AI draft v1 is kept.
Final check before submit
Your access to each source, re-checked now.
Submit is paused.
The revoked document is out of the packet. Refresh the evidence to rebuild claim 2.
Refresh evidenceA revoked document is removed and submit pauses.
Record the disposition
Recommendation from the analyst example
3 claims · all sourced · 1 low-confidence claim checked
You record the final disposition. The system never does.
RULENever fully automatic. Humans govern disposition in multiple layers, in every release. Release 1 (S), from E06.
Record dispositionA person records the disposition. Release 1 rule.
Audit record
Append-only. Every version is kept.
Export the packet.
Restricted sources are left out whole; field-level redaction is not available across all sources.
Export packetCopy to case systemAppend-only record. Nothing is overwritten.
Every evidence ID cited in the frames above, from the case Evidence Pack. Wording is quoted or closely paraphrased from the source. Tap a frame number to jump to it.
| ID | Title | What it says | Used in frames |
|---|---|---|---|
| E01 | Operations analyst interviews | Analysts spend a median 11.5 hours on each exception case; 4.2 hours go to locating and reconciling source records.Limitation: Six interviews from one operations team | 1 |
| E02 | Pilot telemetry | 18% of eligible weekly cases used the draft-summary pilot more than once.Limitation: Eight-week pilot; usage instrumentation does not explain abandonment | Not cited in these frames |
| E03 | Pilot quality review | 84% of sampled summaries were judged materially accurate; 14% contained at least one claim reviewers could not trace to a displayed source.Limitation: Fifty sampled cases; reviewers used the current manual standard | 3 |
| E04 | Frontline interview | Analysts value a starting draft but reopen source systems because the draft does not show why a source was selected or what was omitted.Limitation: Repeated in four of six interviews | 2 |
| E05 | Operations leader | Standardize the final review packet and reduce median case cycle time by 40% this quarter; a narrower first release is acceptable if it is used consistently.Limitation: Commercial commitment has already been discussed with executives | 5 |
| E06 | Compliance lead | Every material claim must link to an authorized source; the human approver, source set, model and prompt version, edits and final disposition are kept in an auditable record.Limitation: Compliance has not approved automated dispositions | 3 5 6 |
| E07 | Compliance lead | A user must not see or retrieve a source they could not access in the underlying system; exported packets must not reveal restricted source content.Limitation: Existing access groups are available; a new identity system is not | 2 4 6 |
| E08 | CTO | The six-week executive demo should show ingestion from all five source systems, autonomous research, automatic disposition and a configurable executive dashboard.Limitation: No engineering estimate has been completed | None. Automatic disposition conflicts with S's RULE; not planned. |
| E09 | Engineering discovery | Reliable connectors already exist for the case system and document repository; ticketing, call-recording and policy systems would each need a new connector and security review.Limitation: Two engineers are available for four weeks before one moves to another commitment | 1 |
| E10 | Support observations | 27% of pilot outputs are manually reformatted before review; users also copy the final packet into the case system.Limitation: Based on 63 support-tagged cases | 3 6 |
| E11 | Incident report | In three pilot cases, a revoked document remained in an already generated draft until the user refreshed the evidence set.Limitation: No customer data was exposed outside authorized users | 4 |
| E12 | Sales note | Northstar's renewal sponsor wants proof of measurable adoption and a credible path to broader source coverage, not necessarily all five connectors at launch.Limitation: The renewal decision is in ten weeks | Not cited in these frames |
| E13 | Designer usability session | Users missed low-confidence language shown only as a small badge; they noticed an inline explanation and a required confirmation step.Limitation: Five participants | 3 |
| E14 | Security architecture | On-prem model endpoints, role groups, append-only audit storage and source-system permission checks are in place; there is no field-level redaction across all sources.Limitation: Architecture review is current as of the fictional case date | 1 2 6 |