A vendor deck, paper, press release, PoC result, security claim, or investment thesis can sound precise while leaving the decision-maker with no defensible next move. Start with the claim and the decision that depends on it.
Structured intake · no files collected · human review · no guaranteed favorable answer
Separate what the source actually says from the commercial or strategic conclusion being implied.
Identify the evidence supplied, the classical baseline, and the dependencies that could produce a false positive.
Route toward no action, monitoring, a triage, a deck review, a PoC pre-mortem, or deeper independent testing.
The claim resolves from the available evidence or does not affect a live decision.
The signal is worth tracking, but the evidence is not yet decision-grade.
A focused first read for a near-term vendor, PoC, investment, or board conversation.
Interrogate the claim, evidence, baseline, dependencies, and questions to take back to the vendor.
Design the null tests and failure-mode checks before the experiment produces a misleading success.
When the decision warrants a deeper reproduction, null test, or independent evaluation.
Describe the claim and where it matters. This form does not accept files. Do not paste confidential material or send sensitive attachments; after review, you will receive next-step instructions if appropriate.
Reality Check is an intake and preliminary routing process, not a certification, legal opinion, investment recommendation, or guaranteed favorable verdict.
Firebringer sells analysis, not migration products, hardware, tokens, or vendor referrals. The answer may be proceed, pause, redesign, test further, monitor, or reject. The instrument is useful only if it is allowed to say no.