The results release is the exhibit to the filing, so the agent drafts it against the rule that actually reaches it, records the build, and holds it for the disclosure officer who signs.
A results release is drafted, and that same text goes to the Commission as the Item 2.02 exhibit.
02
A non-GAAP measure appears, and Regulation G asks for a reconciliation, not for a place on the page.
Reason
03
The release reports a closed quarter, so Instruction 2 carries Item 10(e)(1)(i) across, and no more.
04
A deal release quotes an adjusted margin, and the prominence rule does not reach that release.
05
A cautionary paragraph is carried forward, and it is marked as a claim about present fact.
Decide
06
A forward-looking line is drawn, and the facts qualifying it under 78u-5 sit outside the draft.
07
A figure moves, and the bridge beneath it is re-added rather than reformatted around the change.
Out
08
A release cannot be tied back to the closed ledger, and that is recorded as the finding.
09
Execute write actions only within the approval boundaries fixed at implementation.
→Product statement
Drafting, reconciliation and the draft trail belong to the agent. Release belongs to a named disclosure officer, who signs the report on behalf of the company and owns it there.
Example workflow
One release, close to wire
AgentHuman
1Inputs receivedClose package, adjustment schedules, the guidance range, prior releases and counsel notes
2Release class fixedWhether this is a results release under Item 2.02 or a release governed by Regulation G alone
3Draft raised against that classThe headline, the reconciliation table, the cautionary block and the officer quote
4Checks appliedProminence checks, bridge arithmetic, cautionary-language diffs and drafting confidence
No human action required
Stages 1 to 4 run unaided, and nothing reaches a wire at any of them — the agent is drafting, and the officer lane opens at the release gate.
5DecisionSplits at the release gate
Clean against the fixed class
Goes to the named disclosure officer to release.
Anything contested
Adds a securities-counsel read first.
Officer review
The draft is held with its release class, its reconciliation and the source each figure came from.
Release · Append source · Send to counsel review
Released — by the named disclosure officer▼
6Filing and wire records updatedOnly where write access and the records policy permit it
7Release evaluatedClass accuracy, bridge ties, officer corrections and what counsel review found
Officer corrections
Each correction the officer makes is scored in the evaluation.
What should not run autonomously
Human approval stays in control
Outside the boundary — human approval required8 items
Putting a statement on the wire.
Deciding what this quarter makes material.
Judging which rule reaches this release.
Signing the current report for the company.
Automation boundaryAgent acts unaided
✓Fix the release class before a line is drafted.
✓Reconcile the non-GAAP measure to its nearest GAAP twin.
✓Diff the cautionary block against the one shipped last quarter.
✓Hold the draft, the tables and the sources in one numbered record.
Nothing crosses a wire except by a named disclosure officer, inside the agreed boundaries.
Deciding a named risk has not yet materialised.
Telling the market a figure is final.
Choosing the guidance range a release carries.
Changes to the release, the tables or the filing.
Example output
One results release, annotated
This serves a communications team whose draft becomes the exhibit to a federal filing; below is one release exactly as the agent leaves it.
Results release · completed quarterIllustrative example
Release
Recorded as
Class
Evidence of record
Confidence
Held for
Results release, one closed quarter
Reconciled to the close package
Item 2.02, furnished
Close package, 6 August 2026
Held unreleased
The disclosure officer, by name
As receivedBuilt from the close package and the adjustment schedules under it, and it claims nothing past them.
What the draft record holdsClose packageAdjustment schedulePrior-quarter release
Why no release herePutting a release on the wire is a call a named officer alone makes.
ActionReleaseAppend sourceSend to counsel review
What the score decidesBelow the configured threshold a draft gets a counsel read before the officer sees it.
Value
Where AI adds value
The same four claims, placed at the point in the workflow where each one applies.
Where the value landsValue 01 – 04
Each release draftedFrom the figure that carries it
03Evidence
Where the evidence lands
The agent does not vouch for a figure, only for where it came from, which rule the release sits under, and how the draft was built from it.
01Approved path
The release is the filing
Regulation G asks for a reconciliation and says nothing about placement; the prominence rule sits in Item 10(e)(1)(i)(A), and one instruction carries it over.
02Human review
Checked for, and not found
No published evaluation was found of a model drafting a securities-compliant results release, and no enforcement action was found whose central allegation is the press release itself, so the evidence here is analogical and is reported that way.
04Build an evidence trail
The sentence, the figure under it and the officer who released it stay together.
Integrations
Typical integrations
Five system groups connect to the same agent. Which of them are in scope is decided in discovery.
Close and consolidation systemsERP · group consolidation ledger Closed-period GAAP statements
Adjustment and non-GAAP workFP&A workbooks · schedules Adjustment conventions on file
Prior releases and exhibitsWire archive · furnished exhibits Cautionary language shipped before
Agent
Statement and release drafting
Reads the close Drafts against the class Holds for the officer
Wire and exchange desksWire vendor · MarketWatch notices Notice timings and dispatch times
A release-level correction figure can read clean while newly adjusted measures carry most of the rework. Nestack reports the correction rate by measure class, not only across the release.
Slice performance — reported separately, not only in aggregateIllustrative example
Slice
Failure rate
Lift
Lift vs. threshold
Status
Newly adjusted measures
13.2%
3.7×
Review
Dual-listed releases
9.4%
2.6×
Review
Forward-looking guidance
5.8%
1.6×
Watch
Settled GAAP line items
2.6%
0.7×
Normal
Bar: correction-rate lift vs. settled-line baseline · scale 0–4.0× · tick marks the 2.0× review threshold2 of 4 slices over threshold
Evidence-linked improvement
What an inverted headline costs
The loop shuts when the measure given more prominence than its GAAP twin is a standing case. That suite is what the next release is measured against.
Improvement cycle · five stagesSwitchback — the path turns at Improve and returns at Learn
01Detect
Correction rate rises on newly adjusted measures.
02Diagnose
The headline that led on an adjusted figure because it simply read better is worked backwards until one cause is left standing.
03Improve
Every release goes out numbered, with the drafts that preceded it attached.
04Verify
Nothing goes on the wire while one touched measure case is red.
05Learn
The case stays on, and the drafting rules are redrawn beside it.
Learn → DetectThe return edge. The next release is measured against a suite one case longer.
Typical build scope
Twelve workstreams across six weeks
The build scope read against the delivery timeline. Week structure follows the six-week plan — discovery, sources, drafting logic, evaluation, integration, then production validation and handover.
WorkstreamWeek 1Week 2Week 3Week 4Week 5Week 6
01Release-classification and automation-boundary work.
02Close, schedule and prior-release sources.
03Draft-source-to-release and prominence-rule mapping.
04Close-package ingestion.
05Class, figure and period binding.
06Prominence scoring and review routing.
07Officer release workflow.
08Filing and wire integration.
09Measure and prominence cases.
10Guardrails and drafting controls.
11Draft-trail instrumentation.
12Deployment, documentation and Agent Care handover.
12 workstreams · 6 weeks · bar shows the weeks a workstream is active — several run in parallelFinal scope and sequence confirmed in discovery
Engagement tiers
What each tier includes
Rows are the capabilities named in each tier's scope. Higher tiers include everything below them.
Capability✓ in scope · — not at this tierPilotOne release, one cycleProductionProduction disclosure workflowAdvancedMultiple releases / jurisdictions
Introduced at Pilot
Drafting to your disclosure rules✓✓✓
Named officer release✓✓✓
Disclosure-calendar baseline✓✓✓
Introduced at Production
Reporting by measure class—✓✓
Counsel review workflow in your systems—✓✓
Approved filing write-back—✓✓
Wire-and-filing integration—✓✓
Introduced at Advanced
Multi-measure reconciliation——✓
Cross-release language packs——✓
Dense release calendars——✓
Multi-jurisdiction release controls——✓
Build priceFrom $5,000From $8,000Custom quote
Final build priceConfirmed after discovery based on integrations, workflow complexity, release volume, approval controls and deployment requirements.
Separate from buildBuild pricing is separate from recurring Agent Care, which covers managed monitoring, evaluations, incidents and verified improvements after launch.
What we need from you
What you bring, and what we build with it
Each input maps to a piece of build scope and a week in the delivery timeline.
You bringWe build with it
01Your live releases and the class each one falls under→Class capture and prominence versioningWeek 1
02Representative close, schedule and prior-release material→Source binding, drafting logic and the release baselineWeek 2
03Your results calendar and the officers it names→Rule-class mapping, source binding and the automation boundaryWeek 1
04Access to the relevant systems, feeds or exports→Close, schedule and wire-system assessment, then integration setupWeek 2
05Sentences you would not want deposed on→Prominence cases and the evaluation roundWeek 4
06What no release may imply→Prominence scoring, review routing, guardrails and release controlsWeek 3
07A named disclosure officer who releases→Disclosure-officer sign-off, then pilot and production validationWeeks 5–6
Nothing else is requiredDeployment, documentation and Agent Care handover are ours.
Delivery timeline
Four phases across six weeks
Widths follow the work rather than the grid, which is why one band sits beneath another in week five.
PhaseW1W2W3W4W5W6
DiscoveryW1
BuildW2 – W3
EvaluateW4 – W5
Pilot & LaunchW5 – W6
Week focusW1Rule-class discovery, prominence versioning and the automation boundaryW2Close and schedule integration, and the disclosure-calendar baselineW3Drafting logic, reconciliation checks and release controlsW4Evaluation suite, prominence cases and failure-mode testingW5Wire and filing integration, pilot drafts and targeted correctionsW6One reporting cycle run under the disclosure officer, then Agent Care handover
Reading the bandEach bar spans only the weeks its own work is named for, and week five is shared by design.
At the end of W6Once the release record validates, Agent Care adopts the agent.
DurationSix-week plan shown · typical delivery 4–6 weeks depending on scope confirmed in discovery.
Next step · Communications AI agent
Build a release drafting agent around the rule your last results release was actually written under.
Show us one results release you publish each quarter and the reconciliation sitting behind its headline. If the adjusted figure leads and the GAAP figure waits in a later paragraph, the layout is the exposure. A release nobody can class comes back as a finding.
