What can I do here?
VectorCourt does two jobs. It either challenges a decision or turns a brief into a sequenced backlog review. The product is most useful when the cost of being wrong is higher than the cost of asking harder questions.
Use the job that matches your input. If the input is thin, contradictory, or in the wrong mode, VectorCourt will ask for clarification or refuse instead of pretending confidence.
Job 01
Challenge a decision
Use this when you already have a decision, plan, architecture, release, or tradeoff and want the hidden failure mode, missing assumption, or reversal condition.
- The decision or proposal itself
- Constraints, scale, timeline, and context
- Anything that would make the verdict sharper, not longer
- A structured verdict with confidence, risks, and blind spots
- Specific missing assumptions or weak points
- Architecture-audit coverage and Nemesis scaffold holes when the filing is a system-level audit
- Next actions or reversal conditions when they matter
- Generic brainstorming with no real decision to pressure-test
- Political or electoral prompts
- Backlog generation from a project brief
Job 02
Create a project backlog from a brief
Use this when you have messy text, notes, or a project brief and need a sequenced backlog. The engine behind this mode is Genesis.
- Text only for now, not files or images
- What exists today versus what is only intended
- Constraints, deployment assumptions, and desired backlog depth
- A dry-run review first, not instant work-order creation
- Project state, contradictions, open questions, and proposed WOs
- Sequencing, evidence notes, and explicit insufficiency when the brief is weak
- A single sentence asking for “a full backlog” with no grounding
- Instant authoritative WOs from contradictory source text
- Anonymous write-path creation into shared project state
Domain Coverage
Supported now: Software architecture · Infrastructure scaling · Build vs buy · Product decisions · Release validation · Pre-deployment risk assessment · Technology selection · Vendor evaluation · Incident and postmortem analysis · Risk assessment
Clarification-first, not fully covered: Robotics and automation · Manufacturing design · Logistics optimization · Process engineering · Policy and governance · Safety-critical system design
These areas can still be reviewed when the filing provides operating environment, failure tolerance, validation evidence, human override, and authority boundaries. Without those facts, VectorCourt should ask before answering.
When VectorCourt Asks Clarification Or Refuses
The product will say the brief is too thin instead of inventing confident-looking output.
Genesis will surface contradictions and ask for clarification before it synthesizes backlog.
A backlog brief belongs in Genesis. A concrete decision belongs in verdict mode. VectorCourt can nudge, but it should not guess silently.
Refusal is part of product quality. Unsafe WO synthesis is intentionally blocked instead of hidden behind polished formatting.
What Happens After Output
You get a verdict page or wait page, then a structured result you can inspect, share, and challenge.
You review the dry-run first. Authenticated users can save project-bound state and later approve selected drafts into shared workledger. Anonymous users stay export-only.
It is not generic chat, not a WO factory for fiction, and not a substitute for clear ownership or execution.