# DenQAI: startup site fatal flaw register

File-specific companion · 2026-09-10

## Purpose

Which site condition could prevent the proposed practice from opening as planned?

**Who:** Owner, licensed architect, local code/land-use reviewers, and project counsel

**Records:** Site-specific use/authority, accessibility, utilities, infrastructure, lease, environmental, and inspection records.

## Complete the file

1. For each gate, obtain the required_direct_record and record evidence_status.
2. Have the reviewer document a finding, current blocker, and next_request with a decision_deadline.
3. Set spend_limit_before_clearance and break_condition before releasing the dependent commitment.

## Definitions

- **Fatal flaw:** Condition that can defeat the proposed use or require material redesign or cost.
- **Direct record:** Site-specific controlling evidence rather than a general assurance.
- **Spend limit before clearance:** Owner-defined cap on commitment while the gate remains unresolved.

## Fictional example

Fictional example: SITE-02 lacks a site-specific accessible-route review; the next request goes to the architect before the related layout is finalized.

## Review and next action

Obtain the direct record for the next material site gate before spending beyond its stated limit.

The raw register does not inspect property or establish legal/code compliance; clearing a row requires qualified site-specific evidence.

[Related DenQAI guide](https://denqai.com/startup)

## AI coach prompt

Help me use DenQAI’s startup site fatal flaw register. My question is: Which site condition could prevent the proposed practice from opening as planned? Explain these terms in plain language: Fatal flaw, Direct record, Spend limit before clearance. Ask one question at a time about the required records: Site-specific use/authority, accessibility, utilities, infrastructure, lease, environmental, and inspection records. Walk through the supplied fictional example before asking me for inputs. Treat every missing value as unknown, not zero. Do not invent source records, contract terms, legal conclusions, or clinical facts. Use only permitted fictional or aggregate, non-identifying information. Follow this boundary: The raw register does not inspect property or establish legal/code compliance; clearing a row requires qualified site-specific evidence. End with the missing evidence and this next step: Obtain the direct record for the next material site gate before spending beyond its stated limit.

## AI review prompt

Review my permitted fictional or aggregate draft of DenQAI’s startup site fatal flaw register against the file instructions. Check each required field and period, units, evidence locator, assumptions, arithmetic where formulas are actually supplied, and unresolved contradictions. Check the sequence: For each gate, obtain the required_direct_record and record evidence_status. Have the reviewer document a finding, current blocker, and next_request with a decision_deadline. Set spend_limit_before_clearance and break_condition before releasing the dependent commitment. Separate facts from assumptions and missing records. Do not supply unsupported numbers or make a professional decision for me. Apply this limitation: The raw register does not inspect property or establish legal/code compliance; clearing a row requires qualified site-specific evidence. Return corrections, questions for the responsible reviewer, and the next action.