What a Readiness Report Contains

Text version of this map

The same map as plain structure — every component, then every connection — for screen readers, search, and AI agents. Also available as Markdown and JSON; every published map is listed in llms.txt.

Components

• What a readiness report contains A readiness assessment is delivered as one structured private report, always in the same seven-part order — the verdict first, then the reasoning behind it, what to do, what was found alongside, what the method couldn't settle, and the evidence trail underneath. This is the shape of the deliverable; each part has a defined job and a defined discipline about what it must never do.
  • 1 · Scope and question What was assessed and the exact question it answers — the assessed workflow, the use case, what's explicitly excluded, and the assumptions the assessment rests on. It sets the boundary; it does not sneak in recommendations or readiness claims.
  • 2 · The verdict, up front The overall readiness judgment stated plainly and early — one of four honest outcomes — with a short rationale, the constraints behind it, and an explicit posture on how sufficient the evidence was. No buried lede, no fake numerical precision.
  • 3 · Dimension by dimension The reasoning behind the verdict, one section per readiness dimension: the evidence basis, the findings, the judgment for that dimension, and any uncertainty or contradiction. This is where the verdict is earned — dimension by dimension, without blurring them together.
  • 4 · What to do about it Recommendations in a grounded priority order — each tied to a finding, each with its expected effect and any dependencies. What it is not: generic best-practice filler, or findings dressed up as advice.
  • 5 · Related material findings Things found alongside the core assessment that are genuinely material — noted with why they sit outside the main scope and whether they affect readiness directly or indirectly. Kept separate so they neither inflate the result nor quietly reverse it.
  • 6 · What the method couldn't settle The honest limits: missing or inaccessible evidence, contradictions left unresolved, constraining assumptions, and where the assessment stopped. Stated plainly, without apology and without pretending the gaps don't matter.
  • 7 · The evidence trail The appendix that ties it together: the evidence behind the findings, with its source class and observations, traceable back to the dimensions and findings it supports. No new claim appears here for the first time — it grounds the report, it doesn't extend it.

Connections

1. 1 · Scope and question → 2 · The verdict, up front: verdict stated (sequence)
2. 2 · The verdict, up front → 3 · Dimension by dimension: reasoning follows (sequence)
3. 3 · Dimension by dimension → 4 · What to do about it: grounded in findings (sequence)
4. 4 · What to do about it → 5 · Related material findings: then what's adjacent (sequence)
5. 5 · Related material findings → 6 · What the method couldn't settle: and what's unresolved (sequence)
6. 6 · What the method couldn't settle → 7 · The evidence trail: traced to evidence (sequence)