Plans
Start with the decision, not the plan
The first review exists so that you can see whether the process is useful before committing to a larger purchase. It costs nothing and you get the verdict, the key assumption and the first test. The full sealed report from that first review unlocks separately, for 15 €.
Later reviews are paid. The plan depends on the task — check one decision, go deeper on one that is expensive to unwind, compare options, or run a complex matter — not on how clever the answer is.
You describe the decision
The review runs in full: the same panel, the same debate, the same fact checking.
You get the first result for free
Verdict, the key assumption and the first test — before the irreversible step.
You decide whether you want the whole report
It is already written and sealed. Unlocking costs 15 €.
The free result is not a demo review: what is limited is the delivery, not the depth of the review itself.
What is free and what is held back
More on how the free result works — expand
We run your first review at our own cost: three critics, the same procedure, the same fact-checking. It ends with the verdict — APPROVE, REVISE or REJECT — and with it the single most dangerous assumption behind your decision and the first check worth doing before the irreversible step. The report explaining it — what the critics found, how serious it is, what to do — is already written and sealed; unlocking it costs 15 € — half the price of a review. You pay only if the verdict looks worth the detail.
The report waits 7 days for your decision: the bot reminds you a day before the deadline, then we delete it along with the case materials. Holding someone else's documents indefinitely, in case they decide one day, is not something we consider right.
Early access: the service is open and access is granted instantly. The buttons open the bot — no registration and no waiting for approval. The first verdict is free; the service is young and we collect feedback on every case.
where we suggest you start
Check a decision
Panel
30 € / $30
1 review
Check one important decision. Three mandates for your situation — the other side of the deal, an industry check, a financial check — arguing with each other, with a risk map and open-source research. A contested fact is flagged, not re-argued.
Buy in the bot≈ 1580 ⭐ in Telegram Stars
when the decision is irreversible
Check a decision you cannot undo
Full panel
90 € / $90
1 review
Check a decision that is expensive to reverse. Seven critics, a full round of debate and a decision-bias reviewer: it looks not at the decision but at how you got there. Up to 15 documents, your own mandate. Comparing several options is Premium.
Buy in the bot≈ 4740 ⭐ in Telegram Stars
every option, stress-tested
Compare the options and choose
Premium
250 € / $250
1 review
Compare options: one panel tests up to three equally hard and shows where each breaks. Independent scoring first, then argument aloud. Senior models of both vendors — when the cost of being wrong exceeds the price gap. One review only, not a series.
Buy in the bot≈ 13160 ⭐ in Telegram Stars
A review for a company
Special matter
from 1 200 € / $1 200
by contract
A complex corporate decision. A series of reviews on one matter: 7 critics, up to 80 pages, a year of follow-up. The founder discusses it beforehand and stays reachable; the panel writes the report, not him. By contract only.
Discuss the caseWe start with a conversation: tell us the case, we come back with an estimate.
How to choose
- One defined decision → Panel
- Expensive to unwind, many stakeholders and material → Full Panel
- You need an honest comparison of several options → Premium
- A large corporate matter, a series of linked decisions → Special matter
- Not sure → take the five questions
What each plan includes
The full table of rights: the numbers come straight from the service configuration, so they cannot drift from reality. Below the table — what each term means in practice. One thing to know before you pay: your review runs in the language you write in. Write in English and the hearing, the bot and the sealed PDF are English; write in Russian and they are Russian. Sample English reports are on the samples page.
Show all plan differences
| Right | Panel | Full panel | Premium | Special matter |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Critics on the panel Independent roles attacking the decision, beyond the one who runs the session. | 3 | 7 | 7 | 7 |
| Decision-bias reviewer Looks not at the decision but at how it was made: anchoring, sunk cost, confirmation bias in the record — not personality traits. | — | yes | yes | yes |
| Debate Critics clash with each other after their statements. | yes | full round | full round | full round |
| Rounds of intake How many times the panel comes back with questions before the review. | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Options when you have no decision yet Arrive with a situation and the panel puts two to four genuinely different options on the table; you pick one, and that one gets attacked. | yes | yes | yes | yes |
| Every option examined and compared One and the same panel goes through each draft separately; the report shows what held up against what. | — | — | 3 | 5 |
| Your own mandate on request You name what is missing — we seat that mandate on the panel. | — | yes | yes | yes |
| Panel edits How many times the assembled panel can be reshuffled. | — | 2 | 3 | 5 |
| External facts and fact review External facts with sources are gathered before the panel sits, and before printing the report is checked by a model from the other provider with live search. The critics themselves do not browse: eight of them would search for the same thing eight times over. | yes | yes | yes | yes |
| Role-specific research Public data on the subject gathered before intake. | yes | yes | yes | yes |
| Documents per case Files: PDF, DOCX, photos, screenshots, spreadsheets. | 8 | 15 | 20 | 40 |
| A4 pages in total Total volume: PDFs by page, everything else at 1,800 characters. | 10 | 20 | 30 | 80 |
| XLSX spreadsheets Excel is read row by row: up to 3 sheets, head and tail of each. | yes | yes | yes | yes |
| Risk map What can go wrong, with likelihood and price. | yes | yes | yes | yes |
| Main-risk breakdown The “causes — event — consequences” chain with barriers. | — | yes | yes | yes |
| A SECOND round on a contested fact Fact review runs in every review, the free one included. This is different: if a fact does not hold up, the panel takes a recess and works it through again instead of simply striking it. | — | yes | yes | yes |
| Mandate briefs appended What each mandate tested and what it treated as a warning sign. | — | — | yes | yes |
| Detailed hearing transcript An appendix to the report: the raw statements of each role before synthesis, with the named procedures of the method. Sent as a separate file with /materials; its fingerprint is printed inside the report. | — | — | yes | yes |
| Top models of both vendors The senior models of each line, not the workhorses: the list is reconciled with vendor pricing daily. | — | — | yes | yes |
| Voice You dictate, the panel replies by voice. | yes | yes | yes | yes |
| Voice per day How much speech we transcribe and speak back in a day: “voice included” and “ten minutes of voice” are different promises. | 10 min | 20 min | 40 min | 60 min |
| Free questions to the panel How many times you can ask about the service and the case before a review opens. | 8 | 15 | 25 | 40 |
| Case volume How much of your text reaches each critic: the description, intake answers, transcribed attachments. | 60k | 200k | 400k | 900k |
| Follow-up after the verdict, days We come back to the case and remind about the action items. | — | 90 | 180 | 365 |
| Priority in the queue Your review runs even when daily capacity is spent. | — | yes | yes | yes |
What all of this means
Glossary of the terms in the table — expand
How the panel is assembled
The panel is assembled for YOUR case rather than taken off a shelf. After the intake we name the mandates — Mandate “The other side of the deal”, Mandate “Domain expert”, Mandate “Financier” — and show them to you before the review: what each one tests and why it is in this case. You do not have to study the mandates or pick between them — the panel is already assembled; all we need from you is “go ahead”. Adjusting it in plain words is available on the plans that list a number of line-up edits above. Each mandate gets its own brief and a distinct set of analytical lenses from the “O-18” method, distributed without repeats. A mandate is a testing assignment, not a person: it has no personal professional experience, and the quotation marks hold the name of the mandate rather than anyone’s name.
What “critics on different vendors’ engines” means
Part of the panel runs on Anthropic models, part on OpenAI models. That is the core of the method, not a technical detail: two independent systems err differently, and agreement between them is a stronger signal than confidence from one. Model names are not printed in the report.
What counts as a document and an A4 page
A document is one file you send: a PDF contract, an XLSX sheet, a screenshot, a photo of a page. An A4 page is the unit of volume: PDFs count by page, everything else at 1,800 characters. Two caps are needed because ten screenshots and one hundred-page contract are different work. If a file does not fit, we say so BEFORE attaching it to the case.
Your own mandate on request
You name what is missing (“I need transfer pricing covered”), we clarify the task with one question, build the brief and show it to you before the review. That mandate takes a seat on the panel rather than being added on top of the plan. We never impersonate a real living person.
The decision-bias reviewer
Joins from the “Full panel” upwards: the “Panel” plan and the free first review do not include it — see the rights table above. The analyst examines not the decision but how you arrived at it: where the wording shows signs of confirmation-seeking, sunk cost, or the first-opinion effect. The wording is honest — “signs are visible”, not “we measured”: measuring biases without standardized tasks is impossible, and we do not promise it.
Debate and the full round
Every critic first writes INDEPENDENTLY, without seeing what the others wrote: that is part of the method on every plan, the free review included, and it is what defuses the first-opinion effect — in an ordinary discussion whoever speaks first sets the frame for everyone else. Only then do the critics clash on the points where they disagree — a separate stage, not a recap. “Full round” means the argument runs until positions are exhausted and the synthesis is reviewed by the second vendor. On the recommended plan there is debate but no second round: a contested fact is flagged and stays contested.
Rounds of intake
Intake is the clarifying questions asked before the review. One round — 3–5 questions and off we go. Two rounds (Premium) and three (Special matter) — the panel comes back with new questions after your answers until the picture is complete.
Recheck of a contested fact
If a critic relies on a fact that does not hold up, the review takes a recess: the fact is checked separately with live web search and that round runs again. On the lower plan such a fact is simply flagged as unverified — which is more honest than passing it off as established.
Follow-up after the verdict
We come back to your case after the review: we remind you of the action items with their check dates and ask what has changed. 90 days on the Full panel, 180 on Premium and a year on Special matter. This is not a newsletter — it is contact about one specific decision.
What you get in the end
The Decision Review Report runs three to four pages: the panel, the verdict (APPROVE / REVISE / REJECT), the Essentials block, what to change, what to do instead, dated action items and a SHA-256 seal. The appendix holds the case materials, statements, debate, the roll-call vote, dissenting opinions and sources; it is sent on request with /materials, and its fingerprint is printed inside the report. Only the report is the original and the evidence: a printout or copied text is a reading copy, and the appendix is not the report. Authenticity is checked by attaching the file on the verification page. The report reaches you in the bot within a day of your answering the intake questions — usually much sooner.
What no plan includes
We do not give legal, financial or investment opinions, we do not take the decision for you and we do not guarantee the outcome. Verdicts are produced by language models; a contested fact is flagged, not presented as truth.
The refund guarantee covers the first payment for the “Panel” plan: if the panel found not a single material objection, we refund the full amount. It does not cover repeat reviews or unlocking the report of your first review. Claim within 7 days of the later of two dates — delivery of the report or its payment; the money is returned within 10 working days.
Bring a colleague — earn a hearing. Every customer has a personal invitation link: the /invite command in the bot. Rewards are granted once the invitee has paid for a hearing and the refund window has passed — clicks and views do not count:
- the first paying — the held report unlocks — for you and your invitee
- 3 paying — a free “Panel” hearing
- 5 paying — a one-time upgrade of a hearing to “Full panel”
What every review includes, whatever the plan
- the subject of the decision is confirmed with you before the review starts, not guessed;
- critics work independently first, then clash in debate;
- external facts are checked in a separate pass on another vendor’s engine and are never presented as established;
- the proportionality of the criticism is reviewed separately, so ordinary business risk is not dressed up as a threat;
- the document is edited before it is sealed;
- the result ends with a next step, not only a list of risks.
How deep those procedures go depends on the plan — the table above shows exactly what differs. Listed here is only what every review has, including the free first one.
What you receive
Immediately, free
The verdict, the most dangerous assumption and the first test.
In the full report
The reasoning behind each finding by severity, the conditions under which the decision should be revisited, dated action items, sources and the stated limits of the review.
After delivery
An action plan from the resolutions, reminders about deadlines and a question about the outcome — within the follow-up your plan includes.
Guarantee: no material objections — full refund
If on your first payment the panel finds no material objection, we refund the full amount. The first review carries no charge anyway, so the guarantee is tied to the payment, not to the review number. A material objection is a finding marked “critical” or “high”, or a directive from the “Resolved” section. Findings of “medium” and “low” importance, clarifying questions and requests for further documents do not count.
The number of material objections is counted by software and printed inside the report — you do not have to recount anything or take our word for it. The deadline is 7 days from issue. Full rule — section 9 of the agreement.
How to pay
With Telegram Stars right in the bot; roubles — by card, SBP or SberPay through YooKassa; euro and US dollars — an invoice from lava.top.
More on payment methods, store markup and company invoices
With Telegram Stars — right in the bot, from the plan card. Apple App Store and Google Play rules — and through them Telegram’s — require digital goods inside the messenger to be sold for Stars only. An honest warning: Stars bought in the App Store or Google Play cost about a third above face value.
By card, SBP or SberPay — in roubles through YooKassa; in euro or US dollars — an invoice from lava.top. No store markup here. Pick a plan in the bot, we will ask which currency you pay in (roubles, euro or US dollars) and send the link. A rouble payment goes through the YooKassa page: Russian card, SBP or SberPay, and the fiscal receipt (Russian 54-FZ) is emailed by the platform itself. A currency invoice from lava.top is payable by international card, Apple Pay, PayPal and local methods (SEPA, iDEAL, Bizum, MB WAY, PIX, Bancontact). Each currency has its own price rather than a daily-rate conversion. The platforms do not accept cryptocurrency. A payment needs an email address — the platforms require it, we do not.
A question about payment or a refund — the /paysupport command in the bot. Support answers from the facts of your payment; anything contested goes to the owner.
Need an invoice for a company, or closing documents — write to the bot and we will issue them. There is no automation for this: the paperwork is prepared by hand, so tell us before you pay rather than after.
Before you pay
Four things worth doing before money moves. Each is verifiable and none of them asks you to take our word for it.
- Read a real report — an issued document, not a sample.
- Read where the method gets it wrong — we say it ourselves.
- See what happens to your materials.
- Verify an already issued file — the hash is computed in your own browser.
Not sure which plan you need?
Start with the free first result. There is no need to buy a plan in advance just to see what the service does.