Pilot testing and feedback

Test one prepared case, review its source evidence, and return findings that the project owner can reproduce.

This plan is for the business partner and invited reviewers. It checks whether you can complete the workflow using these guides without a live explanation.

Before you begin

Arrange the following with the project owner:

• Service access and a private channel for returning feedback.
• A prepared survey and the original PDFs for examiner review.
• Agreement on model spend before starting a full examination.
• A qualified reviewer who can assess the records and proposed ownership.

Keep credentials and private deal records out of public feedback. The hosted pilot shares one service tenancy and a concurrency limit. If another examination is active, coordinate with the owner rather than repeatedly starting jobs.

Session 1: connect without model spend

1. Follow Connect your agent. Use the tester kit if your client needs the local bridge.
2. Ask the agent to call list_surveys. Confirm that the returned surveys match the owner’s prepared cases.
3. Run the synthetic ownership example in Prompts and worked examples using compute_mineral_ownership and mineral_buying_summary.
4. Check that the agent keeps mineral interest (MI) separate from nonparticipating royalty interest (NPRI). Ask it what verified and closeable establish.
5. Save the tool responses and record any instruction you could not follow without help.

These three tools do not start the document-reading or model-analysis pipeline. This session succeeds when the tools work and you can explain the synthetic quantities and verification limits. If connection fails, follow Troubleshooting and record the failing step.

Session 2: one agreed paid case

1. Choose the prepared survey with the owner and agree to the operational spend plan. Follow Your first examination.
2. Use provider="fixture", driver="bfs", and no browser sourcing or purchase opt-ins for this first packet.
3. Start exactly one examination. Save the returned job ID outside your chat.
4. Disconnect and reconnect your client. Retrieve status using the same job ID. The server-side job continues after client disconnection.
5. When reports_ready=true, retrieve the available reports and follow Read and review the results.

This session succeeds when you can reconnect to the same job and recover its available reports. If the result is incomplete, record the gaps and limits. A clear incomplete result can be useful. An unsupported complete chain is a defect.

A timeout or reconnection does not authorize a second run. If the job fails, save its state and redacted error, then ask the owner to investigate before another paid start.

Session 3: examiner review

1. Give the qualified reviewer the original PDFs, job ID, and saved reports.
2. Trace at least one instrument path from the starting record to the earliest available predecessor. Record every unresolved cited instrument.
3. Check every proposed mineral owner and fraction against the operative language. Review probate distribution, reservations, name continuity, and subject-tract acreage.
4. Check lease status where relevant. A record packet alone may not establish expiration, production, or held-by-production status.
5. Fill the review sheet’s Correct and Notes columns. Include source pages for corrections and explain what evidence is still needed.
6. Return the review sheet and feedback through your agreed private channel.

This session succeeds when the owner receives source-backed corrections and an unresolved-evidence worklist. Do not use another generated answer as the reference. The repository’s recorded benchmark does not establish independent examiner approval for this pilot or a new live deal.

What to record

For a documentation failure, quote the short passage or identify the exact step. State whether it blocked you or caused an incorrect action. For unreadable diagrams, inaccessible navigation, or missing downloads, include your browser and device details.

Feedback template

Copy this template into the message or file you return to the owner:

Case / job ID:
Task I was trying to complete:
Documentation URL and heading / step:
Client, browser, operating system:
Prompt or steps used:
Expected result:
Observed result and timestamp:
Affected artifact / county / volume-page / field:
Source page and proposed correction:
Impact on the title conclusion or ability to finish:
Screenshot, saved response, or redacted error:

Remove credentials and unnecessary personal or deal information before sharing. There is no feedback-submission tool in the service. Use the channel arranged with the owner; do not publish private records in the documentation.

Useful acceptance criteria

Use these criteria to decide which pilot findings remain open:

• You connect without checking out the full source repository.
• The agent chooses an exact returned survey name rather than inventing one.
• You save one job ID and recover the same job after reconnection.
• The reports expose unresolved citations, failed quality review, and coverage limits.
• You distinguish job completion, arithmetic verification, and examiner approval.
• The reviewer can trace proposed interests to records and return evidence for corrections.
• You can follow the guides, read their diagrams, and open the linked examples without a live explanation.

Compare your findings with Accuracy and known limits. For missing records, follow Add records after a gap.