CONTEXT(CLONE)
Sign in

Standards, regulator and patent source watch

For: Regulatory intelligence analyst or research and development lead tracking an external field

Pattern: WatchtowerNeeds a connectorDesigned for 10 to 400 agents
Get early accessSign in to use

The pain today

The field moves through consultations, draft standards, guidance notes and filings spread over many sites. Keyword alerts produce noise, and the change that affects a live project is found by accident.

The ask

“Watch the regulator, standards body and patent office pages on my attached list. Compare each change against the attached summaries of our active projects, and tell me only when a change affects one of them, with the changed passage and the project assumption it touches.”

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

  • List of regulator, standards body and patent office pages
  • Summaries of active projects with their key assumptions
  • Glossary of our technical terms and their synonyms

The unit of work

One worker task per one changed source against the assumptions linked to it.

Why a swarm fits

Sources change independently. Linking each project assumption to the sources it rests on means a change re-opens only those assumptions, and everything else is left alone.

Not for

Following one regulator's newsletter: subscribe to it.

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.

  1. Run control, between rounds

    Another round?A choice among options

    Between rounds

    Judged from the two captures, has this regulatory source changed since the last check?

    Sees only: The previous and current capture of one source page

    Why: Unchanged sources end there, and a source that stops responding is reported.

    • ChangedthenContinue
    • UnchangedthenStop
    • Could not be fetchedthenMark unresolved

  2. Planner, while planning

    Scope checkYes or no, with a probability

    Before work starts on a unit

    Does the changed passage use a term, or a synonym from the glossary, that appears in any active project's assumptions?

    Sees only: The changed passage, the glossary and the index of project assumption terms

    Why: Replaces keyword noise with a link to something a project actually depends on.

    • Yes: 0.50 or higherthenAccept
    • Unsure: 0.20 up to 0.50thenAccept
    • No: below 0.20thenSkip this unit

  3. Before workers, before a task runs

    Small worker or strong modelYes or no, with a probability

    Before a task runs

    Is the changed source a legal or standards text whose wording needs the strong model, rather than a news item or a meeting notice?

    Sees only: The source's title, document type and the changed passage

    Why: Normative wording is read carefully; notices are read cheaply.

    • Yes: 0.50 or higherthenEscalate to a strong model
    • Unsure: 0.25 up to 0.50thenEscalate to a strong model
    • No: below 0.25thenAccept

  4. After workers, the judge checks

    Evidence checkYes or no, with a probability

    After a worker answers

    Does the changed passage alter a limit, a test method, a deadline or a scope definition that the quoted project assumption depends on?

    Sees only: The changed passage before and after, and one quoted project assumption

    Why: An alert reaches a project lead only when the dependency is visible in the two quotes.

    • Yes: 0.85 or higherthenAccept
    • Unsure: 0.50 up to 0.85thenMark unresolved
    • No: below 0.50thenSkip this unit

  5. Run control, between rounds

    Retry or stopA choice among options

    After a rejection or low confidence

    What is the status of the changed text?

    Sees only: The source's status line, dates and document header

    Why: Drafts and final texts call for different responses and are never mixed.

    • Final, in force or dated to enter into forcethenEscalate to a strong model
    • Draft or open consultationthenContinue
    • Status is not stated on the pagethenMark unresolved

  6. Accountable person, before anything is settled

    Person decidesYes or no, with a probability

    Before anything is reported as settled

    Would this change, if it applies, force a project to alter its design, its test plan or its timeline?

    Sees only: One verified alert with the affected assumption

    Why: Whether a change applies is the regulatory or project lead's judgement, not legal advice from a swarm.

    Accountable: The regulatory or project lead decides whether a change alters the project; this is monitoring, not legal advice.

    • Yes: 0.30 or higherthenAsk a person
    • Unsure: 0.10 up to 0.30thenAsk a person
    • No: below 0.10thenAccept

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.

  1. Planner

    A strong reasoning model links each project assumption to the sources that could change it.

    Decisions here:2. Scope check

  2. Workers

    Small fast workers from an open-weight family each read one changed source and extract what is new.

    Designed for 10 to 400 agents, one worker task per one changed source against the assumptions linked to it. Each worker receives only its own unit.

    Decisions here:3. Small worker or strong model

  3. Judge, from a different model family

    A decision model from a different family checks the change really bears on the quoted project assumption.

    Decisions here:4. Evidence check

  4. Reconciler

    A strong reasoning model groups changes per project and keeps drafts and consultations apart from final texts.

    Decisions here:1. Another round?5. Retry or stop

  5. Accountable person

    The regulatory or project lead decides whether a change alters the project; this is monitoring, not legal advice.

    Decisions here:6. Person decides

Checked before anything is accepted

  • Each alert quotes the changed passage and the assumption it touches
  • Draft, consultation and final status is stated for every source
  • Sources that could not be fetched are reported, not assumed unchanged
  • Changes judged irrelevant are logged with the reason

What comes back

  • Alerts per project with quoted change and affected assumption
  • Upcoming consultation deadlines found in the sources
  • Log of changes judged irrelevant
  • Sources that stopped responding

What to measure

  • Alerts the project lead acts on
  • Relevant changes learned elsewhere first
  • Analyst hours per watched source
  • Cost per re-check

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 use

More in Research and intelligence

Literature review where every claim cites a passage

For: Research lead, analyst or doctoral researcher scoping a field before committing to a direction

A review means a very long reading list.

Pattern: Map, verify, reduceNeeds scale5 decisionsDesigned for 30 to 800 agents

Competitor teardown from public sources with citations

For: Strategy analyst, product leader or founder preparing a market entry or board discussion

A teardown is stitched from a few web pages and hearsay.

Pattern: Hierarchical decompositionNeeds a connector6 decisionsDesigned for 20 to 500 agents