Track what each tenement and permit obliges you to do — expiry, expenditure, rent, reporting and the conditions on the grant — assemble the evidence, and leave every lodgement to the tenement manager.
Take the tenement and permit register, the grant documents and the conditions written on each title.
02
Read the expenditure ledger, rent and rates notices, reporting deadlines and the clearances already held.
Reason
03
Date every obligation on a title — expiry, renewal, rent, minimum expenditure, reporting and relinquishment.
04
Match spend, reports, payments and approvals to the obligation each one discharges and the title it sits on.
05
Read the registry's own record back against the company's and keep the fields where they disagree, dated to the extract.
Decide
06
Flag a commitment running short, a date in reach and a condition with no evidence attached to it yet.
07
Route heritage, native-title and landholder matters to the people and the counsel who own them.
Out
08
Present the obligation pack — the date, the condition as written, the evidence found and what is missing.
09
Retain the sources read, the register version, the match made, the confidence and every manager amendment.
→Product statement
The agent tracks, matches and assembles. Lodging, renewing, surrendering, varying a permit and deciding a condition has been met stay with the tenement manager.
Example workflow
One title's year, end to end
AgentHuman
1Titles drawnThe tenement and permit register, each grant document and the conditions endorsed on it
2Obligations datedExpiry, renewal, rent, minimum expenditure, reporting and relinquishment, on that jurisdiction's rules
3Evidence matchedSpend, reports, payments, approvals and clearances matched to the obligation each one discharges
4Records reconciledThe registry's record read against the company's, field by field, with each difference dated to its extract
No human action required
Stages 1 to 4 run without a person in the loop — dating, matching and the reconciliation finish before anyone is asked to read anything. Nothing is lodged in that stretch.
5DecisionSplits on evidence confidence and whether heritage, native title or a landholder is involved
Dated, evidenced, uncontested
Reaches the tenement manager as a complete pack.
Evidence missing, or heritage involved
Goes to the person who owns that obligation first.
Tenement manager
Reads the obligation, the condition as written, the evidence attached and what is missing, then decides what is lodged and when.
Accept pack · Amend · Refer
Pack accepted — handed back▼
6Pack handed overHanded to the tenement manager as a draft; nothing is lodged, renewed, surrendered or varied by the agent
7Outcome evaluatedWhat the manager amended, what the registry queried, and what fell due with no evidence behind it
Amendments
What the manager re-dates or refers is counted in the evaluation.
What should not run autonomously
Human approval stays in control
Outside the boundary — human approval required8 items
Lodging, renewing, surrendering or transferring a tenement.
Applying for or varying a permit or licence.
Deciding that a condition has been met.
Determining a heritage, native-title or landholder obligation.
Automation boundaryAgent acts unaided
✓Date each obligation from the grant's own conditions.
✓Match spend, reports, payments and clearances to the obligation each discharges.
✓Read the registry's record back against the company's and keep the differences it finds, dated to the extract.
✓Assemble the pack, naming the evidence still missing.
Write actions run only inside the approval boundaries agreed during implementation. A lodgement is never one of them.
Certifying an expenditure or operations report.
Nominating the ground given up at relinquishment.
Releasing a rent, rates or security payment.
Giving legal advice on what a condition requires.
Example output
One obligation on one title, annotated
Everything the agent proposes is attached to the title and the obligation it came from.
Obligation pack · one title, one obligationIllustrative example
Title
Obligation
Due in
Proposed
Confidence
Condition met
Exploration licence
Minimum annual expenditure
34 days
Raise as a shortfall
90%
Not decided by the agent
As receivedThe title, the obligation in the grant's own words and the date it falls due — read from the register, not restated.
Evidence usedExpenditure ledger linesRegistry record, this weekCondition text on the grant
Why a shortfallPart of the spend claimed to this title was incurred on ground since given up.
ActionAccept packAmendRefer
What the score decidesConfidence decides how hard the manager reads this, not whether the commitment is met.
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
Every title you holdFrom the tenement and permit register
03Obligations
Work from the words on the grant
Use the conditions endorsed on each title, the clocks that jurisdiction runs, and the agreements already in place.
01Approved path
Keep the quiet obligations visible
A rent notice, a report and a relinquishment date carry the same forfeiture risk as a headline commitment, and they are the ones that go unwatched.
02Human review
Reach it while it can still be met
A commitment running short, or a clearance not yet held, reaches the tenement manager with time to act rather than after the date has passed.
04Build an evidence trail
Retain the sources read, the register version, the evidence matched to each obligation, the confidence and every amendment — on both paths.
Integrations
Typical integrations
Five system groups connect to the same agent. Which of them are in scope is decided in discovery.
Tenement systemsLandtrack · Global Tenements Trimble · In-house tenement registers
The obligations that get missed sit on the newest ground
Exposure follows how recently ground arrived. A decade-old lease repeats its obligations yearly; ground from an acquisition, second-jurisdiction titles and surrender years do not. Nestack reports performance by slice, not only in total.
Slice performance — reported separately, not only in aggregateIllustrative example
Slice
Failure rate
Lift
Lift vs. threshold
Status
Newly acquired tenements
5.7%
3.9×
Review
Titles in a second jurisdiction
4.1%
2.8×
Review
Relinquishment and surrender years
2.7%
1.8×
Watch
Long-held granted mining leases
1.3%
0.9×
Normal
Bar: re-dated-or-missed obligation rate, lift vs. long-held lease baseline · scale 0–4.0× · tick marks the 2.0× review threshold2 of 4 slices over threshold
Evidence-linked improvement
A missed date is a wrong rule, not a diary slip
The fix is not a date corrected in a calendar. What changes is the rule that dated it, the test the evidence is held to, or the source the obligation was read from.
Improvement cycle · five stagesSwitchback — the path turns at Improve and returns at Learn
01Detect
Re-dated obligations or registry queries rise on a title cohort.
02Diagnose
The rule that produced the date is read before the date itself is touched.
03Improve
A named owner approves the corrected rule, dated from the period it applies.
04Verify
Every title on that rule set is dated again and read against what happened.
05Learn
The corrected rule is written into the register the next year is dated from.
Learn → DetectThe return edge. A rule that dates an obligation is changed by a named owner, before the next cycle runs on 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, titles and rule sets, dating and evidence logic, evaluation, integration, then production validation and handover.
WorkstreamWeek 1Week 2Week 3Week 4Week 5Week 6
01Workflow discovery and automation-boundary definition.
02Tenement and permit register assessment.
03Jurisdiction rule sets and obligation calendars.
04Grant and condition-text extraction.
05Expenditure, rent and reporting data access.
06Evidence matching and obligation tests.
07Registry reconciliation and differences.
08Agreement and heritage obligation routing.
09Evaluation suite, date recall and regression cases.
10Manager review and amendment capture.
11Tenement-system integration and write-back.
12Observability, deployment 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 jurisdiction, one registerProductionProduction register integrationAdvancedMulti-jurisdiction portfolio
Introduced at Pilot
Obligation calendar dated from the grant✓✓✓
Condition text kept beside each obligation✓✓✓
Evidence matched to each obligation✓✓✓
Registry and company record reconciliation✓✓✓
Heritage and native-title matters routed to owners✓✓✓
Lodgement stays with the tenement manager✓✓✓
Baseline evaluation✓✓✓
Introduced at Production
Manager review workflow and write-back—✓✓
Observability and evaluation—✓✓
Introduced at Advanced
Multiple jurisdictions and rule sets——✓
Group portfolios and enterprise controls——✓
Build priceFrom $5,000From $8,000Custom quote
Final build priceConfirmed after discovery based on the number of titles and jurisdictions, register and finance integrations, condition and agreement complexity, 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 tenement and permit register as it actually stands→Tenement and permit register assessmentWeek 1
02The jurisdictions you hold ground in and their calendars→Jurisdiction rule sets and obligation calendarsWeek 1
03Grant documents and the conditions endorsed on each title→Grant and condition-text extractionWeek 2
04Access to expenditure, rent and reporting records→Expenditure, rent and reporting data accessWeek 2
05Your heritage, native-title and landholder agreements, and who owns them→Agreement and heritage obligation routingWeek 4
06Obligations you have missed, and the ones you nearly did→Evaluation suite, date recall and regression casesWeek 4
07A named tenement manager to review packs→Manager review workflow, then pilot packs 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. Week 5 carries both the evaluation work and the first packs a tenement manager reads.
PhaseW1W2W3W4W5W6
DiscoveryW1
BuildW2 – W3
EvaluateW4 – W5
Pilot & LaunchW5 – W6
Week focusW1Register, jurisdictions and the automation boundaryW2Grant documents, condition text and the expenditure data wired inW3Obligation dating and evidence matching on the first jurisdictionW4Evaluation suite, date recall and registry reconciliationW5Register write-back, supervised packs and targeted correctionsW6Managers work live packs beside your own calendar, then Agent Care starts
Reading the bandWeek 4 re-dates title years that have already run, so the dating rules are argued out against real outcomes before a live year depends on them.
At the end of W6The manager who lodges has worked a live obligation cycle beside the existing calendar, then Agent Care takes over monitoring.
DurationSix-week plan shown · typical delivery 4–6 weeks depending on scope confirmed in discovery.
Next step · Mining AI agent
Build a tenement-tracking agent around your obligation calendar.
Show us your tenement register, the grant documents behind it and who lodges what today. We'll date one title's year from its conditions and put the rule behind each date beside it, so you can argue with the rule.
