Review a team's claim, evidence gaps, and next decision
Edit the sample claim, check readiness, and record decisions before a team asks for review.
Start where a reviewer starts
The sample shows the team's claim, the review standard, and the next gap to close.
- Start1 / 8
Start with the claim, readiness, and decisions
A team edits the claim, checks readiness, and records decisions before asking for review.
Try editing. This preview keeps changes only for this session.
- Operating72%
Personal runway audit done; cofounder agreement signed; governance still partial.
- Founder84%
All four founders committed full-time; complementary skills mapped; trust score high.
- Market58%
Discovery interview captured; willingness-to-pay signal in mid-market; competitor map missing.
- Narrow target segment to mid-market ops leads (50-500 FTE).
- Drop small-business pricing from the first launch.
- Co-founder agreement signed, 4-way equal common with 4-yr vest.
Local decisions can be removed here and reset on refresh.
Supporting recordsPrivate notes, progress trend, and equity records stay available without crowding the main review path.+
AI notes, action items, and program feedback stay private until the team acts on them.
Week-over-week signal, weighted by evidence quality.
- Alex Reyes21.875%
- Priya Singh21.875%
- Diego Park21.875%
- Yuki Tanaka21.875%
- Option pool12.5%
- Common total87.5%
How review stays fair
Teams move through five review areas in order. Programs can adjust pace; standards stay fixed.
Programs can tune pace and sequence without changing the standard.
More evidence can help; weaker standards cannot. Readiness summarizes evidence, reviews, decisions, and open risks.
Two more discovery interviews from the target segment
Ready to start the real workspace?
Start with the claim, readiness, and decision record already in place, or book a walkthrough.