AI output QA for regulated teams
AI output QA for regulated teams
Regulated work does not merely need to be right; it needs to show how you knew, who decided and what the evidence was. That changes what a verification step has to produce.
At risk
A reviewer approving without a recorded scope
At risk
Client material that cannot be uploaded to a third-party tool
At risk
No reconstruction of why something shipped last quarter
Somebody has to be accountable for the result.
What an auditor will ask for
Three things, usually: what the process was, who was responsible for this specific item, and what they actually examined. A tool that produces a score answers none of them on its own.
That is why the output of a check needs to be an artefact — findings, severities, a version, a name — rather than a grade in a dashboard.
Why offline is not a preference here
Many regulated teams cannot send unpublished material to a third-party service at all, which quietly rules out most of the verification market. Browser-side checks remove the question instead of managing it.
Start free
The first pass costs nothing and uploads nothing.
Run one of your own deliverables before deciding whether the gate belongs in your process.