Co-pilot buyer activation × triage

Buyer Reply Triage Dashboard

A DEFONEOS co-pilot dashboard that classifies every buyer reply into GREEN, AMBER, RED or UNKNOWN, assigns the next proof object, updates the CRM score, and keeps the owner inside the honesty guardrails.

6reply classes

9score events

5 mintriage routine

1next action

Use now: open this page immediately after a buyer reply or a validation request. Classify the signal, choose the smallest proof object, keep the owner gate clear, and log the action in the DEFONEOS CRM.

What this dashboard decides

This page is the operating sheet for the first buyer reply. It prevents over-talking. The job is to convert a reply into one of six classes, choose one artefact, and set exactly one next action.

Classify before drafting. Reply class drives tone, proof object and CRM score.
If the reply is GREEN, ask for a dated validation slot. If AMBER, give one useful object. If RED, close gracefully.
Never send uncontrolled claims. Every response includes an honesty line where a certification, partnership, or clearance is not complete.
Keep all contact-note fields minimal: role, organisation, public email, buyer words, next action, consented meeting notes.

Reply triage matrix

Reply class	Buyer signal	Next move	Boundary
GREEN procurement interest	Buyer asks for route, procurement vehicle, budget owner, quote, SoW, security pack, validation slot or internal stakeholder version.	Add +30 signal score, answer in five bullets, attach one proof object, ask for a dated validation slot.	Do not send a full deck unless requested. Do not imply endorsement.
GREEN technical validation	Buyer asks how it works, what data is used, what tests exist, how evidence is logged, or how it integrates with their estate.	Add +25, send technical validation agenda plus evidence-room links, ask for 30 minutes with their technical owner.	No sensitive data, no classified systems, no personal surveillance.
AMBER deck request	Buyer says send deck, interesting, circle back, or asks a generic question without authority.	Add +8, send concise evidence-room bundle and one optional next step. Put nurture date in CRM.	No chase spiral. One useful object at a time.
AMBER referral	Buyer forwards to colleague or gives a generic shared mailbox.	Add +12, thank them, reframe the one-line ask for the new owner, keep original buyer in cc only if appropriate.	Do not assume the referral is approval.
RED no fit	Buyer says not in remit, no budget, no route, no authority, or conflicts with procurement policy.	Set -100, send a gracious close-out, ask once for the correct route, then stop.	No pressure language.
UNKNOWN auto-response	OOO, system acknowledgement, helpdesk ticket, generic procurement bounce.	Add 0, schedule based on return date or formal SLA.	Do not mark as interest.

Five-minute triage routine

Run this routine before any reply leaves the owner inbox.

Minute	Action	Output
0 to 1	Read the buyer reply and copy the exact buyer words into the CRM.	No paraphrase yet.
1 to 2	Choose the class: GREEN, AMBER, RED or UNKNOWN.	Signal class and score delta.
2 to 3	Pick one proof object: evidence room, pricing, procurement route, technical agenda, or SoW.	Single link bundle.
3 to 4	Write the response in five bullets or fewer, with one dated ask.	Draft reply.
4 to 5	Check honesty register, no endorsement claim, no sensitive data, then owner sends.	Send or hold decision.

Reply templates by class

GREEN procurement reply
Thank you. The cleanest route appears to be [route]. I can turn this into a capped 90-day pilot with [milestone] and [evidence object]. Would [date option 1] or [date option 2] work for a 20-minute validation slot? Honesty: public-source pilot only, no endorsement or completed accreditation claimed.

GREEN technical reply
Useful question. The short answer is: [answer in buyer words]. The evidence object is here: [single link]. I suggest we validate three things: data boundary, logging, and acceptance criteria. Would a 30-minute technical session with your owner help?

AMBER deck request
Rather than send a large deck, I have attached the smallest evidence-room bundle for your question: [link]. If it is useful, the next step is a 20-minute validation call. If not in remit, I will close the loop.

RED close-out
Understood, and thank you for checking. I will not keep chasing. If there is a more appropriate route for UK-sovereign AI assurance pilots, one pointer would be appreciated. Otherwise I will close this record.

Signal scoring rubric

Use the score as an internal routing tool, never as a truth claim.

Event	Delta	Meaning	Follow-up
Buyer asks for price	+30	Commercially live	Send pricing and SoW only.
Buyer asks for security evidence	+25	Due diligence signal	Send evidence room and technical agenda.
Buyer asks for procurement route	+30	Path signal	Send acquisition pathway page.
Buyer asks for deck	+8	Low-friction interest	Send evidence bundle and one ask.
Referral given	+12	Route possible	Reframe for new owner.
No fit	-100	Stop pursuit	Close and archive.
No reply 7 days	-10	Decay	Move to nurture.
No reply 30 days	-25	Weak	Send one useful update.
No reply 90 days	-50	Dormant	Archive unless new event.

CRM fields to update

buyer_id: [org-role-date]
reply_class: GREEN_PROCUREMENT or GREEN_TECHNICAL or AMBER_DECK or AMBER_REFERRAL or RED_NO_FIT or UNKNOWN_AUTO
signal_score_delta: [number]
buyer_words: [exact words, minimal personal data]
proof_object_sent: [one link]
next_owner_action: [one action]
next_action_date: [YYYY-MM-DD]
honesty_flag: no endorsement claim, no sensitive data, owner-gated send

Escalation rules

Escalate only when the reply creates a real decision path. Otherwise keep the loop quiet and useful.

Escalate to pricing only when the buyer asks cost, budget, procurement or quote.
Escalate to technical validation only when the buyer asks integration, data, test, security, architecture or assurance evidence.
Escalate to owner-gated route when the buyer asks accreditation, clearance, DSP, CE Plus, DASA, DIANA or UKDI status.
Archive when the buyer says no route, no remit, no authority, or asks not to be contacted.

Buyer-safe evidence pack by reply class

The reply class determines the evidence object. This prevents the owner from sending a broad pack that buries the decision in noise. Each bundle has a proof purpose, a stop condition and an honesty phrase.

Reply class	Evidence object	Proof purpose	Honesty phrase
GREEN procurement interest	Procurement vehicles page, pricing card, 90-day pilot SoW.	Show that there is a capped route from interest to pilot.	Draft commercial route, subject to owner and buyer validation.
GREEN technical validation	Technical validation agenda, evidence-room shelf, byte-verification output.	Show how a public-source validation can be run without sensitive data.	Public-source and synthetic data only unless a formal route exists.
GREEN assurance question	JSP 936 mapping, BFT governance route, red-line register.	Show human oversight, control ownership and non-kinetic boundaries.	Designed assurance route; no completed external accreditation claimed.
AMBER deck request	Evidence-room index plus one buyer-specific talking card.	Convert a vague deck request into a small proof bundle.	Small evidence bundle first; full deck only if requested.
RED no route	Close-out template only.	Preserve trust and avoid inbox harm.	I will close this unless there is a better public route.

Internal triage QA before owner sends

Use these checks as a final gate. A reply that fails any check is held for rewrite rather than sent.

Does the first sentence answer the buyer's exact question rather than re-pitching the company?
Is there only one ask, and can the buyer answer in less than thirty seconds?
Does every proof claim link to a public page or clearly say draft, designed, illustrative or owner-gated?
Have all references to MOD, NATO, DASA, DIANA, DAIC, AUKUS or UKDI avoided endorsement language?
Does the reply avoid fear, urgency theatre, kinetic language and personal-surveillance framing?
Is the CRM next action a dated action owned by one person?

12-framework crosswalk

Use this crosswalk when the buyer asks whether the operating artefact can become assurance evidence. It keeps the page honest: designed controls are named as designed, live proof is named as live, and owner-gated claims remain gated.

Framework	How this page maps
EU AI Act	Human oversight, transparency, risk management, logging, technical documentation and post-market monitoring vocabulary.
GDPR	Data minimisation, lawful basis, purpose limitation, retention boundary, access logging and contact-note minimisation.
JSP 936	UK defence AI assurance framing, safety case discipline, human responsibility, evidence pack, review gate and escalation path.
JSP 440	Protective security discipline for information handling, marking, distribution and no-sensitive-data public-pilot boundary.
NIST AI RMF	Govern, Map, Measure and Manage actions tied to buyer signals, evidence quality, risk owners and response cadence.
ISO 42001	Management-system responsibilities, review cadence, audit trail, competence, roles and continuous improvement loop.
NIST PQC	Migration-aware crypto language, no promise of final PQC certification, signature and ledger route designed for future algorithm agility.
NATO STANAG	Interoperability mindset, common vocabulary, coalition-safe evidence, no national endorsement claim.
AUKUS Pillar II	Design-compatible dual-use AI assurance language, no partnership claim without signed letter.
OSCAL	Control evidence can be exported into a machine-readable SSP later; this page is the human operating sheet.
Five Eyes ITAR §734.7	Public-domain and open-source evidence boundary; no controlled technical data, no classified material.
C2PA 2.0	Future media provenance route for screenshots, demos and proof bundles; public page links remain the low-friction evidence trail.

Honesty register

The register below is deliberately explicit so the artefact stays usable in a UK-sovereign procurement conversation without overclaiming.

This page is an owner-executable operating artefact, not legal advice, not government endorsement, and not a submitted procurement response.
AUKUS-compatible means design compatibility only. No AUKUS partnership, DAIC certification, NATO endorsement, DASA award, or MOD approval is claimed.
DEFONEOS-SEAL is not issued here. Any credential requires the 33-agent BFT council quorum plus owner-gated authority.
No kinetic-targeting, strike-package, find-fix-finish, kill-order, face-recognition, phone-location, or individual-tracking pattern is included.
Buyer names and public bodies are routing examples from public procurement context. Nick must verify current named contacts before sending.
All external communications remain owner-gated. JEEVES may draft, verify, package and log, but Nick presses send.
SIGIL anchor is local until the SOV3 ledger response is attached to the tick record.
Generated 2026-07-11T10:19:10Z. File slug: defoneos-mod-buyer-reply-triage-dashboard.