Free · no sign-up · nothing stored

Three ways to find out where you are losing time.

Each one runs in the browser, takes a few minutes, and answers a different question about the same problem. None of them collects an email address, and none of them sends anything anywhere.

Answer them about one decision family, not the whole company. The average always hides the expensive case.
01

Where is your constraint?

Five questions on one decision family. Returns the earliest unmet stage in the decision path — visibility, permission, decision geometry, capacity, or the learning loop — and the mechanism behind it.

Two minutes · five questions
Run it
02

What is the waiting costing you?

Six questions plus revenue. Returns an annual leakage band across three streams and nine value pools, with the assumptions visible. An order of magnitude, not a number to take to a CFO.

Three minutes · needs a revenue figure
Estimate it
03

How does your system behave under stress?

Five questions plus your typical signal-to-response time. Returns the closest of six operating archetypes, and whether the architecture carries the work or people do, benchmarked against your industry median.

Three minutes · five questions
Classify it
What opens on this tab

More of the instrument, not just a teaser.

The homepage only shows the shape of the engaged sequence. Here you can see the tools, the kinds of outputs they produce, and which conversation each one is meant to trigger.

A

Constraint finder

Names the earliest broken stage in the decision path so the conversation starts at the actual bottleneck, not at the loudest symptom.

  • Visibility, permission, geometry, capacity, or learning constraint
  • Mechanism explanation in plain language
  • Best next conversation: training, redesign, or intervention
B

Leakage estimator

Prices waiting across detection, decision, and execution so a team can justify action before the opportunity is lost in another approval cycle.

  • Annual leakage band, not a false-precision answer
  • Three streams and nine value pools
  • Assumptions visible enough to challenge
C

Stress archetype

Shows whether the architecture carries the work under pressure, or whether the result still depends on heroic people bridging broken handoffs.

  • Closest operating archetype under stress
  • Industry-relative benchmark check
  • Signal-to-response behavior in plain terms
D

Agent-facing access

The same reasoning can be called by software through JSON and MCP when the audience is a system, not a human reader.

  • /api/assess for machine-readable assessment
  • /mcp for tool access
  • Same logic, different interface
What they are honest about

Recognition tools, not instruments.

All three run deterministic rule sets over what you report. There is no model call, so none of them can invent a diagnosis — but self-reported inputs are generous, and organizations reliably under-report their own latency. Treat a result as a place to start looking, not a finding.

If you would rather not answer questions

The same reasoning is published as a machine-readable endpoint at /api/assess for agents, and as tools on the MCP server. Those return JSON, not a page — they are for software, not for reading.

After the diagnostic

The result tells you which conversation to have.

A constraint you can name is usually a training problem: the masterclass rebuilds one decision family end to end. A decision already moving and already costing you is an advisory problem. If you are a provider, use the result to decide whether your product stops at recommendation or genuinely helps a customer reach controlled action.