Six industries, one buyer: someone personally liable for output an assistant touched, who cannot currently reconstruct what the assistant actually said.
That you cannot show what it said. A figure went into a memo, the memo went to a client, and six months later nobody can reconstruct where the figure came from — whether the assistant produced it, whether it was checked, whether it was flagged and overridden. You carry that. The tool you used carries nothing.
And the quieter one: that a document you pasted was carrying an instruction. A contract with a line addressed to the assistant. It happens now, it is invisible in the answer, and no existing control catches it.
Privilege review, production, research. Designations get challenged and the exposure lands on a named partner. Professional conduct rules already speak to supervision and candour.
Model risk management already expects independent validation, and record retention rules already exist. The concept needs no explaining.
Reconciliation, sampling, close. Peer review asks whether work was performed with due care, and an auditor asks how a figure was derived.
Prior authorisation, coding, intake. A payer audit asks how a determination was reached, long after it was.
Calculations, specifications, drawing review. A licensed engineer stamps the work and the duty does not transfer to a tool.
Pre-trade checks, screening, reconciliation. Questions arrive in days and the amounts are large.
Two of these lead with you are already required to. Four lead with you are personally exposed. That is the opening line, not the product.
A stated total that does not equal its stated parts. A confabulated figure was never computed, so it fails its own arithmetic at a useful rate.
The misquote that matters is the right digits with the wrong unit or period. Board feet rendered as square feet is a perfect match to your document and moves money.
The one check that gets past a coherent error, because the broker's record of a tool call is outside the model's account.
A CUSIP, ISIN or IBAN carries a check digit. A fabricated one is not hard to find — it is arithmetically impossible.
Your reference data, curated by your people. A finding never says you are wrong: it says what disagrees, from where, and that the reference may be the stale one.
A figure passed into a tool call, in the deliverable, or copied by someone is a different problem from the same figure in scratch reasoning. Findings are ranked by that.
Records are sealed on your machines, under a key your firm holds. We keep no copy — there is no server of ours for your records to be on. One module reaches the network at all: the proxy that forwards the model calls your people were already making, to the vendors you already use.
Every network claim ships in a supply-chain document beside the code, and a checker verifies each claim against the module that makes it — failing the build if one is quietly broken. The same mechanism that publishes our welfare floor publishes this one.
The trivial level — an answer that contradicts itself — is what these checks compute, so it is caught by construction. Above it, we planted errors at three levels of coherence: nine cases in all, five of them clean. The free checks caught none of the planted errors and flagged nothing clean. Nine is a small corpus, and we would rather say so before you ask — but the result lands where theory says it must: every free check is consistency detection, and a coherent error is consistent with itself. That boundary is why the layers above exist: the broker's record of what a tool actually returned, and a reviewer holding evidence the author does not control.
The hardest case is a false premise carried correctly — a wrong contract size with every figure downstream computed correctly from it. The arithmetic verifies. Nothing free reaches that, and a vendor telling a compliance officer otherwise is telling them something they know is false.
The browser layer also needs ongoing maintenance: the selectors belong to other companies and change without notice. They degrade to no capture, never to a wrong one — but that is a support commitment, and you should hear it before you ask.