Launch materials reviewed by a specialist panel
For: Product marketing lead responsible for a launch going out accurate and on time
The pain today
The launch page, press text, pricing sheet and sales deck are written by different people. Claims drift between them, and legal, product and pricing each review only the piece they were sent.
The ask
“I attached the launch page copy, press text, pricing sheet, sales deck notes, the product specification and our approved-claims list. Review them for claims we cannot support, technical errors, pricing inconsistencies and brand voice, and quote every place two documents disagree.”
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
- Launch page copy and press text
- Pricing sheet
- Sales deck notes
- Product specification
- Approved-claims list and brand voice guide
The unit of work
One worker task per one reviewer brief across the launch documents.
Why a swarm fits
Four reviewers with four rulebooks read the same small set. Each holds only its own reference, and cross-document contradictions are found because every reviewer sees every piece.
Not for
A single blog post: one editor with the specification open is enough.
The decision tree
5 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.
Before workers, before a task runs
Small worker or strong modelYes or no, with a probability
Before a task runs
Does this launch piece state prices, plan names, limits or discounts, so that the pricing reviewer must read it?
Sees only: One launch document's headings and any figures in it
Why: Each reviewer reads only the pieces its reference document can judge.
- Yes: 0.50 or higherthenAccept
- Unsure: 0.20 up to 0.50thenAccept
- No: below 0.20thenSkip this unit
Small worker or strong modelYes or no, with a probability
Before a task runs
Does this passage make a performance, security, compliance or comparative claim that needs the strong claims reviewer?
Sees only: One passage of launch copy
Why: The claims that attract legal trouble get the most careful reader.
- Yes: 0.50 or higherthenEscalate to a strong model
- Unsure: 0.25 up to 0.50thenEscalate to a strong model
- No: below 0.25thenAccept
After workers, the judge checks
Evidence checkYes or no, with a probability
After a worker answers
Does the quoted copy promise a capability or figure that the quoted specification line does not state, or states only with a condition the copy drops?
Sees only: The quoted copy and the quoted specification line
Why: Catches the dropped condition, which is how accurate specifications become inaccurate launches.
- Yes: 0.85 or higherthenAccept
- Unsure: 0.50 up to 0.85thenEscalate to a strong model
- No: below 0.50thenReject and retry
Reconciler, while merging
Conflict checkYes or no, with a probability
While reconciling
Do these two launch documents give different values for the same plan name, price, limit or availability date?
Sees only: Two quoted passages from different launch documents
Why: Each owner reviews only their own piece, so cross-document drift is nobody's job.
- Yes: 0.85 or higherthenAccept
- Unsure: 0.50 up to 0.85thenEscalate to a strong model
- No: below 0.50thenContinue
Accountable person, before anything is settled
Person decidesA choice among options
Before anything is reported as settled
Which kind of finding is this, and therefore whose sign-off does it need before launch?
Sees only: One verified finding with its brief
Why: Legal, product and pricing each own their findings, and the launch lead decides go or no-go.
Accountable: Legal owns claims, product owns technical accuracy, and the launch lead decides go or no-go.
- Unsupported or unlisted claimthenAsk a person
- Technical errorthenAsk a person
- Pricing inconsistencythenAsk a person
- Brand voice note onlythenAccept
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 assigns each reviewer its reference document and the launch pieces to read.
Workers
Mid-size reviewers from mixed families, one brief each: claims, technical accuracy, pricing, brand voice.
Designed for 4 to 20 agents, one worker task per one reviewer brief across the launch documents. Each worker receives only its own unit.
Decisions here:1. Small worker or strong model2. Small worker or strong model
Judge, from a different model family
A decision model from a different family checks each finding against the quoted copy and the quoted reference.
Decisions here:3. Evidence check
Reconciler
A strong reasoning model merges findings per document and lists cross-document contradictions with both quotes.
Decisions here:4. Conflict check
Accountable person
Legal owns claims, product owns technical accuracy, and the launch lead decides go or no-go.
Decisions here:5. Person decides
Checked before anything is accepted
- Every finding quotes the copy and the reference it conflicts with
- Claims not on the approved list are flagged even if they sound harmless
- Figures and plan names are compared across all documents
What comes back
- Findings per document and brief
- Cross-document contradictions with both quotes
- Claims needing legal sign-off
- Questions for product about the specification
What to measure
- Findings the owners accept
- Corrections needed after launch
- Review turnaround
- Cost per launch review
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 Sales and marketing
A quarter of sales calls mapped to objections
For: Sales enablement lead or revenue operations manager explaining why deals are lost
The loss reason in the pipeline is a dropdown picked by the seller.
Subject lines and ad copy narrowed by independent judges
For: Lifecycle or performance marketer preparing a campaign under brand and claims rules
Teams test the two variants someone thought of on Monday.
Competitor pricing and product page watch
For: Product marketing manager or competitive intelligence lead keeping battlecards current
Battlecards are accurate the week they are written.