Prepare a sourced investment screening brief
An investment team used specialized research agents to examine a company from several angles, then checked the combined report against its investment criteria and gaps in the evidence.
How this works
An investment team used specialized research agents to examine a company from several angles, then checked the combined report against its investment criteria and gaps in the evidence. Initial screening should reduce uncertainty about mandate fit and identify what further diligence must establish. It should not convert an attractive narrative or an agent consensus into an investment recommendation.
Divide the research into product, market, team, technology, and available financial evidence, but use one shared claim register. Each claim carries its source, date, status, and relevance to the mandate. A second review checks support and contradictions rather than merely rewriting the first report.
Before you start
Defined mandate
Obtain geography, stage, sector, business-model requirements, exclusions, and the screening decision to support.
Research scope
Identify the subject using supplied public materials and prevent confusion with similarly named entities.
Evidence access
Use accessible primary material and authorized documents; report unavailable private information as unknown.
Prepare the inputs
- subject
- Required
Company identifier and materials
Confirm identity, official domains, and the scope of supplied information.
- mandate
- Required
Criteria table
Separate mandatory conditions, preferences, and evidence required for each.
- research_questions
- Required
Checklist
Specify material questions across product, market, team, technology, and finances.
- source_packet
- Required
Documents or references
Record publication date, origin, access status, and whether claims are self-reported.
- optional_time_budget
- Optional / conditional
Time or coverage limit
Declare incomplete areas rather than implying exhaustive diligence.
Implementation, step by step
Frame the screening
- Translate the mandate into testable criteria and prioritized questions.
- Create a coverage matrix with known, unknown, and conflicting states.
Checkpoint: The brief will support a specific next-stage decision.
Collect source evidence
- Review current official materials and relevant independent primary evidence where accessible.
- Capture short evidence notes with provenance and dates, preserving self-reported claims as such.
Checkpoint: Every material finding can be traced to an inspected source.
Research the business dimensions
- Summarize the product, customer problem, market definition, team roles, technology claims, and available financial figures.
- Avoid inferring revenue, ownership, customer relationships, or technical defensibility from promotional language.
Checkpoint: Missing evidence stays visible within each research dimension.
Reconcile claims
- Deduplicate repeated assertions and identify contradictory dates or definitions.
- Use deterministic arithmetic for financial summaries and preserve currency, period, and accounting basis.
Checkpoint: The report does not combine incompatible figures into a false trend.
Run an independent challenge pass
- Review the claim register against the source packet and the mandate.
- Identify unsupported conclusions, reliance on single sources, and questions that require direct diligence.
Checkpoint: The challenge pass adds evidence checks rather than simulated expert agreement.
Prepare the decision packet
- Summarize apparent fit, exclusions, unresolved material gaps, and the next questions.
- Return a preliminary screening status such as further review or insufficient evidence, leaving the investment decision to qualified people.
Checkpoint: The packet states its scope and evidence limits clearly.
Decisions along the way
A mandatory criterion is unverified
Mark fit undetermined and identify the evidence needed.
Public sources conflict on a material fact
Present the conflict with dates and avoid choosing the more favorable claim without a reason.
Only promotional materials are available
Limit the brief to stated positioning and explicit diligence questions.
What you will produce
Screening brief
DocumentA preliminary evidence packet for human investment review.
Include: subject · mandate_fit · dimension_findings · material_gaps · followup_questions
Claim register
TableA traceable record distinguishing facts, self-reports, inferences, and unknowns.
Include: claim · source · date · status · mandate_relevance · review_note
Check the result
- Financial figures retain period, currency, and source status.
- Market size is not confused with the subject's obtainable revenue.
- Repeated coverage is not counted as independent corroboration.
- The conclusion does not imply complete legal, financial, or technical diligence.
When something goes wrong
Entity identity is ambiguous
Pause subject-specific conclusions and ask for a reliable identifier.
A source cannot be accessed
Record the gap and avoid quoting an unread document as verified.
Different agents produce inconsistent findings
Reconcile against original evidence rather than voting between summaries.
A worked example
SYNTHETIC EXAMPLE · NOT A REPORTED BUSINESS RESULT
Request
Screen a software opportunity against a recurring-revenue mandate.
Inputs
Synthetic example. The mandate requires an operating product and evidence of recurring contracts. A product demonstration is available, while a presentation says revenue is growing but provides no contract data or period.
Expected result
Synthetic expected result. The brief records an observed product demonstration and a self-reported growth claim. Recurring-revenue fit remains unverified. Follow-up questions request contract structure, revenue periods, retention definitions, and customer concentration; no revenue estimate or investment recommendation is invented.
Run a small pilot
Start small
One opportunity and a fixed set of screening questions.
Record the baseline
Record current analyst preparation time and material questions missed at first review.
Agree success criteria
Track source traceability, unsupported claims caught, and reviewer time to a next-step decision.
Stop or revise
Stop firm conclusions when entity identity or material mandate evidence is unresolved.
Keep the scope clear
- Public research is preliminary screening, not investment advice or complete due diligence.
- Do not contact subjects, purchase reports, or disclose an opportunity without authorization.
Check before using
Investors verify material claims and make the decision. Public research is preliminary screening, not complete due diligence or investment advice.
Business activities
- Research customers and markets
- Raise capital or evaluate investments
FROM A RECIPE TO YOUR WORKFLOW
Bring the company context together.
This workflow needs reliable inputs before it needs a better prompt. Moat8 Vault brings working information into a readable archive for the AI tools you use.
For this recipe: Company and public materials · Investment mandate · Research checklist
Start with one recurring task, agree which sources to use, and review the first result with your team.
Discuss this workflow