Assemble candidate comparables and their provenance from licensed records, screen draft narrative for prohibited and proxy language, and hold the pool for the state-certified appraiser, who forms the opinion of value.
Retrieve licensed MLS, public and prior-file records for the subject and the market named in the assignment.
02
Deduplicate candidates across sources and keep the record identifier, the status and the retrieval time on each.
Reason
03
Normalise units, dates, living area and lot measures so records from different sources can be read together.
04
Retrieve the sale history behind each candidate, and mark the terms nobody has verified yet.
05
Normalise the subject's own attributes against the assignment file already open in the forms software.
Decide
06
Screen retained rationales and draft narrative for prohibited wording and protected-class proxies.
07
Screen the order file for a contract price or target value, and withhold it from the candidate ranking.
Out
08
Retain the retrieval log, the version stamps and what the appraiser accepted, replaced or rejected.
09
Execute write actions only inside the approval boundaries agreed during implementation.
→Product statement
The agent assembles candidates and evidence; the state-certified appraiser forms the opinion of value and signs the certification that carries it.
Example workflow
One assignment, order to workfile
AgentHuman
1Assignment receivedOrder file, subject record, forms-software file or AMC request
2Candidates retrievedLicensed MLS and public records, sale history, status and retrieval stamps
3Pool assembledCandidate comparables, provenance, unverified fields and confidence
4Controls appliedLicence-scope checks, prohibited-wording and proxy screens, order-file redaction and confidence threshold
No human action required
Stages 1 to 4 run unaided, and no opinion of value is formed at any of them — the agent is assembling evidence, and the appraiser's lane opens at the confidence gate.
5DecisionSplits at the confidence threshold
High confidence
Goes to the signing appraiser to review.
Low confidence
Adds a review-appraiser read first.
Appraiser review
The pool is held with its provenance, its unverified fields and the confidence.
Accept · Replace · Send back for sourcing
Accepted — carried to the workfile▼
6Forms software updatedOnly where write access and approval policy allow it
7Outcome evaluatedComp-set rejection, replacement reasons, screen hits and post-signature findings
Replacements
Every appraiser replacement is counted in the evaluation.
What should not run autonomously
Human approval stays in control
Outside the boundary — human approval required8 items
Forming the opinion of value and reconciling it.
Finalising the comparable set behind a value.
Deriving and applying market adjustments.
Signing the report and its SR 2-3 certification.
Automation boundaryAgent acts unaided
✓Retrieve and deduplicate licensed records into a candidate pool.
✓Normalise units, dates, living area and lot measures.
✓Screen draft narrative for prohibited and proxy wording.
✓Assemble the workfile with provenance, retrieval timestamps and version stamps.
Every retrieval, screen and export runs inside the boundaries agreed at implementation.
Inspecting the subject or verifying sale terms.
Setting scope of work or accepting for competency.
Answering a Reconsideration of Value request.
Submitting to UCDP, an AMC or the lender.
Example output
One candidate comparable, annotated
Everything the agent proposes carries the record it was retrieved from.
Candidate output · single comparableIllustrative example
Comparable
Retrieved line
Living area
Source of record
Confidence
Verification
Closed sale, same tract
Two-storey resale, four blocks from the subject
1,712 sq ft
MLS record, closed status
91%
Sale terms not yet verified
As receivedTaken from the licensed record and its provenance log — nothing on this side is inferred by the agent.
Provenance shownMLS record identifierRetrieval timestampClosed status and date
Why this candidateScreened for proxy and prohibited language before the appraiser reads it.
ActionAcceptReplaceSend back for sourcing
What the score decidesBelow the threshold the pool picks up a second sourcing pass before review.
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 assignmentFrom the assignment file
03Assembly
Retrieve against the file
Draw on licensed records and the search criteria set in the assignment file.
01Approved path
Widen the search, not the call
Routine retrieval, deduplication and normalisation arrive already done.
02Human review
Send the read to the thin evidence
Unverified terms and low-confidence candidates are marked, so the appraiser's read starts where the evidence is thinnest.
04Build an evidence trail
Provenance, retrieval timestamps and version stamps go into the workfile, not a side log.
Integrations
Typical integrations
Five system groups connect to the same agent. Which of them are in scope is decided in discovery.
Appraisal forms softwareACI Sky · ACI Report Bradford ClickFORMS
MLS data infrastructureRESO Web API MLS Grid · licensed feeds
Property dataCoreLogic HouseCanary
Agent
Valuation support
Retrieves records Assembles candidates Holds for the appraiser
Order and review railsReggora · ValueLink Fannie CU · Freddie LCA
An acceptable overall rate can sit on one bad cohort
Comp-set rejection rate counts the candidates a signing appraiser removes or replaces before reconciliation. Nestack reports it by cohort, with the worst cohort read against the best.
Slice performance — reported separately, not only in aggregateIllustrative example
Slice
Failure rate
Lift
Lift vs. threshold
Status
Majority-Black and majority-Hispanic tracts
7.6%
3.6×
Review
Rural non-disclosure states
5.7%
2.7×
Review
Manufactured, ADU and mixed-use
3.8%
1.8×
Watch
New construction and gut renovations
1.9%
0.9×
Normal
Bar: comp-set-rejection-rate lift vs. all-order baseline · scale 0–4.0× · tick marks the 2.0× review threshold2 of 4 slices over threshold
Evidence-linked improvement
A cycle closes when it leaves a test behind
Each closed cycle leaves one more regression case in the suite and one more entry in the screen list, and the next detection is measured against both.
Improvement cycle · five stagesSwitchback — the path turns at Improve and returns at Learn
01Detect
Comp-set rejection rate rises in one cohort.
02Diagnose
The provenance log behind the replaced candidates names the source and the retrieval stamp.
03Improve
A fix lands against a named version, carrying the replacements that prompted it.
04Verify
Nothing releases until the affected regression cases pass again.
05Learn
The case joins the permanent suite and the screen list.
Learn → DetectThe return edge. The next detection runs against a longer suite than this one.
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, retrieval workflow, evaluation, integration, then production validation and handover.
WorkstreamWeek 1Week 2Week 3Week 4Week 5Week 6
01Appraisal workflow discovery and boundary definition.
02MLS, public-record and AVM assessment.
03Search criteria and prohibited-wording list mapping.
04Record retrieval and normalisation.
05Candidate assembly and provenance binding.
06Confidence scoring and sourcing escalation.
07Appraiser review workflow.
08Forms-software and order-platform integration.
09Evaluation suite and cohort regression cases.
10Guardrails, screens and export controls.
11Observability and provenance 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 office, one marketProductionProduction forms softwareAdvancedMulti-panel and AMC
Introduced at Pilot
Retrieval to your criteria✓✓✓
Appraiser review✓✓✓
Comp-quality baseline✓✓✓
Introduced at Production
Cohort disparity reporting—✓✓
Review workflow in your systems—✓✓
Approved write-back—✓✓
Workfile provenance export—✓✓
Introduced at Advanced
Multi-MLS licence scope——✓
Multi-stage panel review——✓
High order volume——✓
Enterprise panel controls——✓
Build priceFrom $5,000From $8,000Custom quote
Final build priceConfirmed after discovery based on integrations, workflow complexity, transaction 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 assignment file and search criteria→Criteria mapping and record retrievalWeek 1
02Representative completed workfiles→Retrieval baseline, normalisation and provenance bindingWeek 2
03Your MLS and data-licence agreements→Licence-scope enforcement and automation-boundary definitionWeek 1
04Access to relevant APIs, feeds or exports→Feed, forms-software and order-platform assessment, then setupWeek 2
05Comparables your appraisers replaced, and why→Evaluation suite, cohort regression cases and failure-mode testingWeek 4
06Your review thresholds and write-back boundaries→Confidence scoring, screen routing, guardrails and review controlsWeek 3
07Named certified appraisers to review pools→Appraiser review 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 occupy. Week 5 carries evaluation and pilot at the same time.
PhaseW1W2W3W4W5W6
DiscoveryW1
BuildW2 – W3
EvaluateW4 – W5
Pilot & LaunchW5 – W6
Week focusW1Appraisal workflow discovery, licence scope and the automation boundaryW2Feed integration and the retrieval baselineW3Assembly workflow, confidence logic and review controlsW4Evaluation suite, prohibited-wording screens and failure-mode testingW5Forms-software integration, pilot assignments and targeted correctionsW6A live order returned to the appraiser, then Agent Care handover
Reading the bandA bar covers only the weeks its work is named in. The week 5 overlap is real, not padding.
At the end of W6The verification pack is signed and Agent Care begins monitoring.
DurationSix-week plan shown · typical delivery 4–6 weeks depending on scope confirmed in discovery.
Next step · Real Estate AI agent
Build a valuation-support agent around your appraisal workflow.
Show us your forms software, your data licences and your search criteria. The appraiser who signs the certification keeps the value, the comp set and the adjustments, and the boundary sits short of all three.
