Link the key data elements your systems already capture to the events that trigger them, hold the file with its gaps marked, and let a named person decide whether it goes out.
Integration availability depends on the client's existing systems and API access.
Agent controls
Six layers between the model and the file
The layers nest. What each one misses is named in the map below.
L6 · Outermost — last line of defenceInward → L1 · closest to the model
L6Rollback / safe modeFall back to record retrieval when evaluation or production signals degrade.Roll back
L5Version monitoringTrack model, prompt, section-mapping and list-scope changes.Track
L4Event trailRecord the source systems, the elements, the gaps and the release.Record
L3Named releaseHold the file for a named person; the hold governs whether it goes out, not whether the links are true.Gate
L2Scope guardrailsTest the file against the elements each section requires and the held-act list; a failure returns the file. A notice on screen is not tested; the section map is.Restrict
L1Confidence thresholdsRoute low-confidence files to a traceability read before release.Require review
Model coreFile prepared — linked events, open gaps, flagged elements and confidence
L1 – L2Test whether a file may stand
L3Puts the release in a person's hands
L4 – L5Keep the event and the elements behind it
L6Reverts to record retrieval when signals degrade
How Nestack evaluates it
Evaluate the linking workflow — not only the file that went out.
Coverage runs the whole depth of the workflow, and every layer is cut by slice.
Surface — the file the investigator reads
Depth of coverage ▼
E1Final-output evaluationDid every linked element match the record it was read from?
E2Step-level evaluationDid the agent use the right lot code, event and section mapping?
E3Tool evaluationDid it read and write the correct event and the correct field?
E4Confidence calibrationDo low-confidence files actually attract more reviewer corrections?
E5Slice evaluationHow does performance change across specific event types?
E6Business outcomeHow many files needed a correction, or a question after they went out?
Floor — the trace the firm answers for
Failure modes
Where each failure originates in the agent
Seven ways a trace breaks, placed by stage.
Agent lifecycleDirection of processing →
01 · Retrieval1 mode
BH-03
Superseded event read
An element is taken from a record that was later corrected.
Stage gathersEvent records, lot codes, partner data and list scope
02 · Reasoning2 modes
BH-04
Position stated wrongly
The rule is described as extended when only enforcement funding is barred.
BH-06
Link asserted, not evidenced
A lot is connected to an event no record actually supports.
Stage proposesLinked events, flagged elements and confidence
03 · Tool / write2 modes
BH-02
File released early
A file goes out with flagged elements still unresolved.
BH-05
Duplicate lot code
The same lot is linked to two codes and both survive.
Stage writesOnly where write access and approval policy allow it
04 · Output1 mode
BH-01
Element missing, unflagged
A required element is absent and no gap is raised.
Stage returnsThe sortable file a named person releases
05 · Change / Version1 mode
BH-07
Silent scope regression
A list or mapping change widens what the agent will assert.
Stage tracksModel, prompt, section mapping and list version
Sev-1 · a file leaves without releaseSev-2 · a wrong link reaches the fileSev-3 · source degrades, file routes to review
Transformation is the slice that goes quiet: inbound lots become an outbound one and the link is rebuilt by hand, so the headline stays flat while that cohort carries the rework. Nestack reports it by slice.
Slice performance — reported separately, not only in aggregateIllustrative example
Slice
Failure rate
Lift
Lift vs. threshold
Status
Transformation events
7.6%
3.3×
Review
Commingled inbound lots
6.2%
2.7×
Review
Partner-supplied elements
3.4%
1.5×
Watch
Single-lot receiving events
2.1%
0.9×
Normal
Bar: element-correction-rate lift vs. single-lot-receiving baseline · scale 0–4.0× · tick marks the 2.0× review threshold2 of 4 slices over threshold
Evidence-linked improvement
A cycle ends in a standing test
A cycle is done when the miss has become a test the next release has to survive. That suite is what the next trace request answered is measured against.
Improvement cycle · five stagesSwitchback — the path turns at Improve and returns at Learn
01Detect
Element-correction rate rises in an event slice.
02Diagnose
Read the files and the event records beneath them together until the cause narrows to one.
03Improve
Version-stamp the change and attach the traces that exposed it.
04Verify
The affected cases run again, and a fail stops the release.
05Learn
It becomes a standing test, and the traceability plan changes with it.
Learn → DetectThe return edge. The suite the next file meets has one more case in it.
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, linking workflow, evaluation, integration, then production validation and handover.
WorkstreamWeek 1Week 2Week 3Week 4Week 5Week 6
01Trace workflow discovery and boundary definition with your quality team.
02ERP, WMS and partner source assessment.
03Event, element and lot-code mapping to each section.
04Event ingestion and normalisation.
05Link assembly and element binding.
06Confidence scoring and gap routing.
07Named-person release workflow.
08ERP and lot-system integration.
09Link-integrity and clock cases.
10Guardrails and release controls.
11Event-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 site, one product familyProductionProduction lot systemsAdvancedMultiple sites / partners
Introduced at Pilot
Linking to your events and records✓✓✓
Named-person release✓✓✓
Trace-completeness baseline✓✓✓
Introduced at Production
Reporting by product and lot—✓✓
Release workflow in your systems—✓✓
Approved write-back—✓✓
ERP and lot-system integration—✓✓
Introduced at Advanced
Multi-partner element rules——✓
Multi-stage quality approvals——✓
High event volume——✓
Multi-site trace controls——✓
Build priceFrom $5,000From $8,000Custom quote
Final build priceConfirmed after discovery based on integrations, workflow complexity, event 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 event records and the fields each one carries→Event ingestion and field mappingWeek 1
02Representative traces you have already run→Linking baseline, lot-code extraction and element bindingWeek 2
03Your lot-code scheme and partner data feeds→Event, element and lot-code mapping to each sectionWeek 1
04Access to relevant APIs, feeds or exports→ERP, WMS and partner assessment, then integration setupWeek 2
05Traces you would not want relied on→Integrity cases and the evaluation suiteWeek 4
06What must reach a person before a trace goes out→Confidence scoring, gap routing, guardrails and release controlsWeek 3
07The named point of contact on your plan→Release workflow, 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
Phases are drawn over the weeks they actually occupy, which is why week 5 doubles up rather than padding.
PhaseW1W2W3W4W5W6
DiscoveryW1
BuildW2 – W3
EvaluateW4 – W5
Pilot & LaunchW5 – W6
Week focusW1Trace workflow discovery, section mapping and the automation boundaryW2Source integration and the linking baselineW3Linking workflow, confidence logic and release controlsW4Evaluation suite, held-act guardrails and failure-mode testingW5Lot-system integration, pilot traces and targeted correctionsW6One trace exercise run under the quality team, then handover
Reading the bandA bar spans the weeks its work is actually named in, and the fifth carries two kinds of it.
At the end of W6The last checks clear on a live exercise and monitoring moves to Agent Care.
DurationSix-week plan shown · typical delivery 4–6 weeks depending on scope confirmed in discovery.
Next step · Food & Beverage AI agent
Build a traceability agent around the links your records already carry.
The rule is in force. FDA proposed an extension it never finalised, and Congress suspended only federal enforcement funding — buyer contracts and state action are untouched. Bring your lot codes, partner feeds and the named contact on your plan.
