Illustrative workflow. Actual results depend on your inputs, configured tools, provider and review.
The goal
Compare a small set of options and return a decision brief with verifiable sources.
Who does what
- Researcher: collect relevant public evidence with links and retrieval context.
- Analyst: compare the options against the owner’s criteria and name uncertainty.
- Editor: check the sources, summarize the tradeoffs and prepare the owner’s decision.
A useful owner checkpoint
“Which constraint matters most: cost, implementation effort or capability?”
The team can save this as a question and wait. Your answer becomes guidance for the continuation; it does not grant new account or server access.
The result to review
A comparison, a short recommendation, the source trail and unanswered questions.
What stays under your control
Retrieved memories and web content can be stale or incorrect. Source-linked recall is not perfect recall. Important claims need review, and high-impact decisions need appropriate human expertise.
What can carry forward
Schedule a reviewed version only when its inputs, budget and review checkpoints are clear. Prior sources remain permission-scoped and can require revalidation.