Skip to the interactive prototype
PK® / AccountBrief

Portfolio project / Evidence-first sales research

AccountBriefAutomated account-research assistant.

Turn a real company name or domain into a sourced, reviewable account brief—without turning missing data into confident fiction.

ResearchEvidenceHypothesesReviewOutreach draft

01 / Interactive system

Research with a visible evidence boundary.

Live public research + offline fixtures
Public-source research, clearly labeled

Real-company searches use fixed Wikimedia endpoints through this site. Results show sources, retrieval time, confidence, and missing fields. No personal contacts are generated, no entered URL is crawled, and no buying signal is invented.

Loaded the offline synthetic Northstar Health Systems fixture.

Offline synthetic fixture

Northstar Health Systems

northstar-health.example

Fixture evidence
Organization summaryHigh confidence

Multi-site outpatient care network

This fictional fixture represents a regional healthcare operator coordinating patient access, referral intake, and revenue-cycle work across a growing clinic footprint.

EvidenceNS-01 · NS-02WarningSynthetic portfolio fixture; it does not describe a real organization.
IndustryHigh confidence

Healthcare operations

The fixture consistently describes outpatient services, patient-access workflows, and revenue-cycle operations.

EvidenceNS-01WarningClassification is valid only inside this synthetic scenario.
Estimated sizeMedium confidence

500–1,000 employees

A fictional careers snapshot and clinic directory support a range rather than an exact headcount.

EvidenceNS-02 · NS-03WarningEstimated range, not a verified employee count.
02 / Account hypotheses

Possible pain points

Pain-point hypothesisMedium confidence

Referral intake may require duplicate entry

The fixture’s operations note describes fax, portal, and phone referrals converging into one central team, suggesting avoidable re-keying and status follow-up.

EvidenceNS-01 · NS-04WarningWorkflow hypothesis; validate volume and rework in discovery.
Pain-point hypothesisMedium confidence

Eligibility checks may constrain scheduling

A synthetic job description emphasizes manual benefit verification before appointments and escalation of incomplete records.

EvidenceNS-03WarningA job description signals responsibility, not measured delay or cost.
03 / Buying group

Decision-maker role hypotheses

Role hypothesisHigh confidence

VP, Patient Access

Likely workflow owner for referral intake, scheduling quality, and access-center performance.

EvidenceNS-03 · NS-04WarningRole hypothesis only; no individual person or reporting line is asserted.
Role hypothesisMedium confidence

Chief Information Officer

Likely technical stakeholder for integration, security review, identity, and clinical-system constraints.

EvidenceNS-02WarningInfluence and purchasing authority require confirmation.
04 / Timing evidence

Buying signals, with evidence attached

Buying-signal evidenceHigh confidence

Patient-access automation role opened

The synthetic careers snapshot includes a newly listed director role responsible for workflow standardization and automation pilots.

EvidenceNS-03WarningFixture evidence only; not a live hiring signal.
Buying-signal evidenceMedium confidence

Two clinics added to the network

The fictional organization update describes expansion that could increase intake volume and process variance.

EvidenceNS-02WarningExpansion suggests possible need; it does not prove budget or purchase intent.
05 / Human discovery

Questions before conclusions

These are questions—not assertions. They turn hypotheses into a measurable discovery conversation.

  1. 01

    How many referrals arrive through each channel, and where is the same information entered more than once?

  2. 02

    Which eligibility exceptions consume the most staff time before an appointment can be confirmed?

  3. 03

    What accuracy, privacy, and human-review thresholds would an automation pilot have to meet?

  4. 04

    How would recovered capacity be measured without assuming it becomes immediate payroll savings?

06 / Personalized outreach

A draft with a human gate.

SubjectA measured referral-intake pilot for Northstar

Hello Northstar Health Systems team,


Your synthetic account fixture points to a practical question: could referral and eligibility work be standardized without hiding exceptions from patient-access staff? I would begin with a bounded workflow study—channel volume, duplicate entry, exception categories, and review requirements—then test one narrow automation against the current baseline.


If those priorities resemble the real operating environment, would a 20-minute discovery conversation be useful?

Review warningDrafted only from synthetic evidence. A human must verify every premise, recipient, tone, and claim before sending.
07 / Source registry

Every sourced fact points back here.

NS-01Company fixture

Synthetic service-line profile

Fictional description of services and operating model.

NS-02Company fixture

Synthetic clinic-network update

Fictional footprint and expansion update.

NS-03Hiring fixture

Synthetic careers snapshot

Fictional roles and responsibilities; not a live job board.

NS-04Research fixture

Synthetic operations interview

Fictional workflow notes created for evaluation.

Loaded source IDs: NS-01 · NS-02 · NS-03 · NS-04. Fixture content is fictional and exists only to demonstrate product behavior.

02 / Accessible architecture

A pipeline built to stop unsupported claims.

Semantic HTML · CSS diagram

Read left to right on larger screens or top to bottom on mobile. The ordered list remains understandable without its visual connectors.

  1. 01

    Input boundary

    Accept a company name or public domain; normalize it, reject personal emails and private hosts, and cap request size.

  2. 02

    Entity resolution

    Search fixed Wikimedia endpoints, score organization evidence, and reject people, media, places, and ambiguous matches.

  3. 03

    Evidence registry

    Read structured public claims, preserve source URLs and retrieval time, and leave missing fields unknown.

  4. 04

    Bounded synthesis

    Separate sourced company facts from low-confidence workflow and role hypotheses. No people or contact details are created.

  5. 05

    Claim guard

    Expose field-level confidence, warnings, point-in-time qualifiers, limitations, and an honest not-found path.

  6. 06

    Human review

    A person verifies the company, evidence, recipient, tone, and proposed next step before any outreach.

03 / Product walkthrough

See the research boundary in motion.

The recorded walkthrough demonstrates the offline fixture path, claim-level evidence, outreach review, and safe abstention. The live interface above now adds sourced public-company resolution.

MP4 demonstrationWritten summary below
Read the written video summary

The recording opens an offline synthetic account fixture, reviews its summary and source IDs, checks pain-point and decision-role hypotheses, reads buying-signal warnings, copies a draft for human review, then searches an unmatched company to show that unsupported claims are withheld. Live public-company lookup was added after this recording and is available in the interactive section above.

04 / Fixture evaluation

Measure the behavior that earns trust.

Deterministic evaluation set
6/6Known resolution cases

Each fixture resolves through its exact company name and canonical domain.

100%Fixture claims source-indexed

Every offline-fixture claim carries confidence, at least one source ID, and a verification warning.

0Personal contacts generated

No fixture or fallback contains an invented person, email address, or phone number.

2/2Unknown-company abstention cases

Each fallback withholds industry, size, pain points, roles, signals, and personalized outreach.

What this proves

The fixture suite verifies deterministic behavior, while mocked route checks cover entity disambiguation, structured claims, dated employee evidence, not-found handling, and provider failure. It does not prove that public records are complete or current, nor does it prove sales conversion or production readiness.

05 / Technology

Small architecture.
Strong boundaries.

  • Next.js App Router
  • React + TypeScript
  • CSS Modules
  • Deterministic fixture resolver
  • Wikidata Action API
  • Wikipedia Action API
  • Organization entity scoring
  • Source-indexed claim schema
  • Browser Clipboard API
  • Node test runner
  • Cloudflare-compatible server route

06 / Safeguards

What the system
refuses to do.

01

No fabricated contacts

The prototype never invents names, email addresses, phone numbers, or reporting relationships.

02

Fixed public providers

Live lookup calls only Wikidata and Wikipedia endpoints. User-entered URLs are never fetched, preventing SSRF-style requests.

03

Unknown means unknown

An ambiguous or unmatched organization receives no invented facts, buying signals, people, or personalized outreach.

04

Claims stay inspectable

Public-source facts include confidence, source IDs, retrieval time, and a warning about what still needs verification.

05

Hypotheses look like hypotheses

Possible workflows and role archetypes are visibly separated from sourced company facts.

06

Human approval is final

Nothing is sent, saved to an account, or acted on automatically.

Project handoff

Evidence first.
Outreach second.

View source on GitHub ↗Back to all projects ↑