Check a flexibility contract portfolio against dispatch obligations
For: Portfolio manager at a flexibility aggregator, or a utility demand-response programme lead
The pain today
Every site contract has its own notice time, duration limit, activation cap, availability window, baseline method and penalty. The market product the portfolio is sold into assumes one set of terms. Gaps show up as failed delivery.
The ask
“I attached our customer flexibility contracts and the service terms of the balancing and local flexibility products we bid into. For each contract, tell me whether its notice time, duration, activation limits, availability windows, baseline and metering terms let us meet each product, and where penalties we owe are not passed down.”
Plain words, as you would say it to a colleague. Edit it to fit your case before you send it.
What you attach or connect
- Customer flexibility and demand-response contracts
- Service terms of each market product
- Prequalification and metering requirements
- Asset list with contracted capacity per site
The unit of work
One worker task per one site contract against one product's terms.
Why a swarm fits
Contracts are independent and each pairing needs one contract and one product's terms. Four briefs read the same pair for different failure modes, so a dispatch gap is not lost behind a commercial one.
Not for
Forecasting available capacity, optimising bids or dispatching assets. It reads terms; it does not see meter data or site behaviour.
The decision tree
6 typed decisions, each with an action for every answer
At fixed moments in a run, the engine puts one narrow question to a decision model. The decision model never writes text: it answers yes or no with a probability, picks from listed options, or gives a score, about a small slice of the material. The engine then does exactly what this tree says, which is what makes the run auditable. The thresholds are the template's design values, not measured results.
Planner, while planning
Scope checkYes or no, with a probability
Before work starts on a unit
Does the contract's asset type and contracted service match a service this product's terms accept?
Sees only: The contract's service description and the product's eligibility clause
Why: Drops contract and product pairs that could never be offered together.
- Yes: 0.60 or higherthenAccept
- Unsure: 0.30 up to 0.60thenEscalate to a strong model
- No: below 0.30thenSkip this unit
Before workers, before a task runs
Small worker or strong modelA choice among options
Before a task runs
Which brief does this contract clause belong to?
Sees only: One clause heading with its text
Why: Gives each specialist a narrow slice and sends tangled clauses to a stronger reader.
- Notice, duration and availabilitythenAccept
- Metering and baselinethenAccept
- Penalties and liabilitythenAccept
- Exclusivity and stackingthenAccept
- Spans several briefsthenEscalate to a strong model
After workers, the judge checks
Evidence checkA choice among options
After a worker answers
Does the quoted contract clause state a notice time before activation, and is it no longer than the notice time in the quoted product rule?
Sees only: One contract clause and one product rule
Why: Reports silence as silence, the term most often assumed and least often written.
- States it, within the product's noticethenAccept
- States it, longer than the product's noticethenMark unresolved
- Contract is silent on noticethenMark unresolved
Evidence checkYes or no, with a probability
After a worker answers
Does the quoted term come from the latest dated amendment or side letter that touches this clause?
Sees only: The quoted term and the dated list of amendments for this contract
Why: Prevents a superseded activation cap or window from being compared with the product.
- Yes: 0.85 or higherthenAccept
- Unsure: 0.50 up to 0.85thenEscalate to a strong model
- No: below 0.50thenReject and retry
Evidence checkYes or no, with a probability
After a worker answers
Does the quoted contract clause make the site liable for non-delivery in the situation where the quoted product rule charges us?
Sees only: One product penalty rule and one contract liability clause
Why: Shows where the aggregator carries a penalty that no site contract covers.
- Yes: 0.85 or higherthenAccept
- Unsure: 0.50 up to 0.85thenEscalate to a strong model
- No: below 0.50thenReject and retry
Accountable person, before anything is settled
Person decidesYes or no, with a probability
Before anything is reported as settled
Does the finding mean a contract cannot meet a product term, or leave a penalty with us that is not passed down?
Sees only: One fit-matrix cell with both quotes
Why: The head of trading and counsel see every delivery or liability gap before the matrix is used.
Accountable: The head of trading owns which assets are offered into which product; legal counsel owns contract interpretation and renegotiation.
- Yes: 0.40 or higherthenAsk a person
- Unsure: 0.15 up to 0.40thenAsk a person
- No: below 0.15thenAccept
The fleet: who does what
Model tiers by role, not brands: you choose the models. Strong reasoning models plan and reconcile, small fast models do the wide work, and the judge is a decision model from a different family, so it does not share the workers' blind spots.
Planner
A strong reasoning model turns each product's terms into a checklist and pairs contracts with the products they serve.
Decisions here:1. Scope check
Workers
Small fast workers hold one brief each: dispatch and notice, metering and baseline, penalties and liability, exclusivity and stacking.
Designed for 8 to 300 agents, one worker task per one site contract against one product's terms. Each worker receives only its own unit.
Decisions here:2. Small worker or strong model
Judge, from a different model family
A decision model from a different family checks each claimed gap against the quoted contract clause and product rule.
Decisions here:3. Evidence check4. Evidence check5. Evidence check
Reconciler
A strong reasoning model builds a fit matrix of contracts by product and keeps clauses the briefs read differently.
Accountable person
The head of trading owns which assets are offered into which product; legal counsel owns contract interpretation and renegotiation.
Decisions here:6. Person decides
Checked before anything is accepted
- Each gap quotes the contract clause and the product rule it fails
- Silence in a contract is reported as silence, not as compliance
- Amendments and side letters are applied in date order before comparison
What comes back
- Fit matrix of contracts by product with reasons
- Contracts that cannot meet notice, duration or availability terms
- Penalty exposure not passed down, by clause
- Ambiguous clauses for legal review
What to measure
- Gaps confirmed by the portfolio manager
- Delivery failures later traced to a contract term
- Review time per contract
- Cost per contract-product pair
Names of measures only. No result is claimed for this template.
Templates open in the workspace chat with the ask filled in. Nothing runs until you send it.
Get early accessSign in to useMore in Energy and utilities
Reconcile study assumptions across an interconnection queue
For: Interconnection manager at a developer, or a transmission planner reviewing clustered studies
Each project's study rests on a base case, on earlier-queued projects assumed in service, on short-circuit levels and on shared network upgrades.
Review maintenance and test records across a substation fleet
For: Asset manager or maintenance engineer at a transmission or distribution network operator
Oil analysis reports, breaker timing tests, relay test sheets and battery discharge tests sit inside work orders.
Trace grid code and tariff changes to every affected asset
For: Grid compliance or regulatory affairs manager at a generator, storage operator or network company
A revised grid code clause or tariff schedule touches some assets and not others, depending on connection date, voltage level, technology and derogations.