Source Policy
Where evidence comes from
We prioritize primary and operationally useful sources: company pricing pages, product documentation, regulatory text, public filings, market reports, procurement materials, technical documentation, and credible operator references. We prefer sources that directly support a commercial claim instead of derivative commentary that only repeats it.
We look for evidence that helps answer practical buying questions: who has the problem, how painful it is, what budget may exist, what systems are involved, what the workflow looks like, and whether the opportunity is narrow, repeatable, and commercially actionable.
Collection
How evidence is collected
Evidence is gathered through a structured research pass before a plan is accepted. The collection step looks for direct support for the problem statement, workflow mechanics, buyer profile, pricing logic, and operational friction that makes the opportunity commercially real.
We do not accept a plan just because the topic sounds plausible. The evidence base has to support a usable plan thesis, not just a broad trend. If the source pack is thin, repetitive, or too indirect, the plan is either narrowed, downgraded, or rejected.
Acceptance
What gets accepted and what gets rejected
A plan is accepted when the evidence supports a specific buyer, a concrete pain point, a believable path to value, and a commercially coherent workflow. We also look for enough independent support to avoid building the thesis on one weak reference.
A plan is rejected or narrowed when it relies on hype language, unsupported market-size claims, recycled summaries, generic AI commentary, or evidence that does not connect cleanly to an actual buying or operating decision.
High
Broader commercial framing is supportable
High confidence means a plan has stronger source coverage and better domain diversity. It still does not eliminate operator diligence, but it does support a wider set of commercial claims about the opportunity, buyer profile, and operating constraints.
Medium
Publishable with directional claims
Medium confidence means the plan is useful and publishable, but some claims should be treated as directional rather than exhaustive. The opportunity is still commercially usable, but buyers should expect narrower support around sizing, edge cases, or implementation details.
Low
Narrow opportunity brief
Low confidence means the evidence base is thinner. These plans should be read as scoped opportunity briefs with tighter claims and higher diligence requirements. They may still be valuable, but only when the commercial framing stays disciplined.