Four questions, then a page you can forward
Most advisory sites make you book a call to find out what the work would look like. This produces the memo first — which engagement, why that one, what happens in week one, what you own at the end, and the circumstances in which you should not buy it at all.
Picking one adds the instruments from the register that reach you, with their dates and sources.
It is assembly, not generation. Every duration, deliverable and obligation comes from a published table or from the regulatory register. Nothing is written at the moment you ask, and no model sits in the path — so the same four answers always produce the same memo, and the one you forward is the one anyone else would get.
This memo applies published rules to the answers you selected, so the same answers always produce the same memo. That makes it reproducible, not correct: the rules can be incomplete, applied to the wrong situation, or out of date, and the answers can be too. Treat it as a starting point for scope, not a confirmed proposal. A person validates the assumptions before any engagement is agreed.
One path returns no engagement at all, and every other path names the conditions under which you should not proceed. That section is not modesty — it is the part that makes the rest worth reading. A tool that recommends buying under every condition is an order form.
Nothing you enter is sent anywhere. The memo is assembled in your browser; there is no endpoint behind this page and you are welcome to check the network tab. If you would rather I saw it, print it and bring it to a conversation.