Vendor Proof Gap Monitor keeps claim coverage, evidence freshness, benchmark confidence, and reuse safety together so leaders stop guessing what can actually stand up to boards, buyers, and investors.
Each packet keeps one owner, one audience, one theme, and one next move attached before the next diligence cycle opens.
Question: Can we point a buyer at one spec suite plus signing-key URL plus audit-stream and answer the procurement question without bespoke prep?
Gap: Public adoption telemetry (who-uses-it) is thinner than the spec depth itself — Pulse fills part of this; vendor adoption badges are still missing.
Ship vendor-adoption badges + spec-use scorecard sourced from procurement-pulse-engine universe.csv
Question: Can we hand a buyer a public, signed measurement of the industry instead of self-report claims?
Gap: Per-vertical sub-issues would compound buyer signal — currently a single combined report per quarter.
Draft an interim between-issues spotlight for one vertical (HealthTech or FinTech) using the existing summarizer.
Question: Can a CFO or CRO open one of these surfaces and answer their operator question without a custom build?
Gap: Net-new lane after archiving 10 exec-family duplicates — buyer signal not yet collected for which of the 4 has highest pull-through.
Add lightweight per-surface usage analytics + a single contact path; let buyer choice show.
Question: Can a regulated-industry reviewer see vertical depth plus readiness language posture without us tripping over compliance vocabulary?
Gap: No HealthTech buyer in the pipeline yet — surfaces are show-don't-tell evidence rather than active sales tools.
Draft a per-vertical HealthTech Pulse Issue to surface measurement of the broader sector beyond just our 8 surfaces.
Question: Can we show a martech / growth-ops buyer a coherent consent + experimentation + tokenization + attribution lane without a 6-month integration project?
Gap: identity-risk-evidence-ledger CI broken (eslint peer-dep, issue #11 filed) — blocks v1.0-prod hardening of one anchor repo.
When Codex pushes CI fix, harden identity-risk-evidence-ledger; meanwhile draft a Pulse Klaviyo-vertical spotlight.
Question: Can a buyer risk team use a free public toolkit to draft AI System Cards, evidence packs, vendor intake, tabletop exercises, and risk registers without signing up for anything?
Gap: Per-tool usage analytics not present — choosing which to deepen next is currently guesswork.
Add minimal client-side counter (no server) + GSC submission for /trust/ subpages to surface usage signal.
The risk map keeps stale evidence, weak benchmark confidence, and blocked proof ownership visible in the same board-readable view.