Free Fit Check Example
What you get before paying.
The free fit check is not a sales call. It is a short technical response that says whether your workflow needs an audit receipt, what the receipt should capture, and whether paid work is worth doing.
Example submission
Workflow: A Claude Code / Codex subagent reviews pull requests before commit.
Current problem: The review often says "looks good" without proving which risky files, tests, or runtime assumptions were checked.
Evidence wanted: files reviewed, tests run or skipped, risky paths checked, and any unverified claims.
Example fit-check response
Fit: yes Why: This is a good audit-receipt target because the workflow already has a repeated decision point: "is this PR safe enough to commit?" The weak point is not the review prose. The weak point is missing evidence quality. Receipt fields I would use: - subject: PR number / branch / commit range - files_reviewed - risky_files_not_reviewed - tests_run - tests_skipped - claims_unverified - reviewer_verdict: pass | fail | incomplete Evidence gaps that should remain incomplete: - tests were inspected but not executed - runtime behavior depends on an external service - generated code was reviewed but not manually run - subagent report was summarized without raw findings attached Paid pilot judgment: Worth a $99 workflow pack if this review is run repeatedly on real PRs. Not worth a paid pilot if this is a one-off prompt or if the team never reviews the receipt after the agent produces it.
What the paid version would add
- a repo-specific `AGENTS.md` or instruction patch
- a narrow `SKILL.md` for the repeated review workflow
- a receipt template in Markdown or JSON
- a short verification file that says how to judge the receipt