| {"config": "build_buy", "decision_job": "PATH_SELECTION", "limitations": ["Native method retained; numeric preference is not a probability or performance benchmark.", "Architecture proposals have no published canonical source; framework facts retain their original cutoff."], "payload_json": "{\"gateCritical\": false, \"id\": \"strategic_differentiation\", \"label\": \"Strategic differentiation\", \"options\": [{\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Name the available products and the exact capability each already covers.\", \"id\": \"buy\", \"interpretation\": \"The workflow is available from several credible products and is not central to competitive advantage.\", \"label\": \"Useful but commodity\", \"value\": -1}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Separate commodity platform functions from logic that must remain yours.\", \"id\": \"hybrid\", \"interpretation\": \"The shell is common, but domain rules or user experience contain differentiated work.\", \"label\": \"Some differentiated logic\", \"value\": 0}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Describe what a competitor could not reproduce by buying the same platform.\", \"id\": \"build\", \"interpretation\": \"The agent's behavior, feedback loop or workflow is part of the product moat.\", \"label\": \"Core proprietary capability\", \"value\": 1}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Get a product-owner decision before treating the score as ready.\", \"id\": \"unknown\", \"interpretation\": \"The strategic role has not been agreed.\", \"label\": \"Unknown\", \"value\": null}], \"order\": 1, \"question\": \"How much of the agent's behavior creates a durable product or operating advantage?\", \"weight\": 3, \"whyItMatters\": \"Commodity capability is expensive to recreate. Differentiating decision logic can be risky to surrender to a vendor roadmap.\"}", "record_id": "strategic_differentiation", "record_type": "WEIGHTED_CRITERION", "review_status": "NOT_REVIEWED", "snapshot_at": "2026-09-17T06:17:24Z", "source_commit_sha": "c8ad4067654a6777cea3b652a80f62dc6aeb21fb", "source_data_hash": "sha256:baa562980cf07255e2bf4fa1fded945dadaffcb7726abf7f7d07313d2d506cbd", "source_url": "https://github.com/PharosProduction/build-vs-buy-ai-agent-scorecard/blob/c8ad4067654a6777cea3b652a80f62dc6aeb21fb/data/criteria.json", "status": "DRAFT", "verified_at": null} |
| {"config": "build_buy", "decision_job": "PATH_SELECTION", "limitations": ["Native method retained; numeric preference is not a probability or performance benchmark.", "Architecture proposals have no published canonical source; framework facts retain their original cutoff."], "payload_json": "{\"gateCritical\": false, \"id\": \"workflow_uniqueness\", \"label\": \"Workflow and policy uniqueness\", \"options\": [{\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"List the required steps and map them to available vendor features.\", \"id\": \"buy\", \"interpretation\": \"The process follows common product patterns with limited exceptions.\", \"label\": \"Standard workflow\", \"value\": -1}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Mark each step as configure, extend or own.\", \"id\": \"hybrid\", \"interpretation\": \"Most steps are standard while a few rules or actions need owned extensions.\", \"label\": \"Standard core, custom edges\", \"value\": 0}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Document the exceptions that generic products cannot express safely.\", \"id\": \"build\", \"interpretation\": \"The process depends on organization-specific rules, exceptions or sequencing.\", \"label\": \"Proprietary policy engine\", \"value\": 1}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Run a workflow discovery session with operators and control owners.\", \"id\": \"unknown\", \"interpretation\": \"The real workflow has not been mapped.\", \"label\": \"Unknown\", \"value\": null}], \"order\": 2, \"question\": \"Are the agent's rules, tools and exception paths standard or organization-specific?\", \"weight\": 3, \"whyItMatters\": \"A standard workflow favors configuration. Deep policy logic and unusual exceptions increase the value of owned orchestration.\"}", "record_id": "workflow_uniqueness", "record_type": "WEIGHTED_CRITERION", "review_status": "NOT_REVIEWED", "snapshot_at": "2026-09-17T06:17:24Z", "source_commit_sha": "c8ad4067654a6777cea3b652a80f62dc6aeb21fb", "source_data_hash": "sha256:baa562980cf07255e2bf4fa1fded945dadaffcb7726abf7f7d07313d2d506cbd", "source_url": "https://github.com/PharosProduction/build-vs-buy-ai-agent-scorecard/blob/c8ad4067654a6777cea3b652a80f62dc6aeb21fb/data/criteria.json", "status": "DRAFT", "verified_at": null} |
| {"config": "build_buy", "decision_job": "PATH_SELECTION", "limitations": ["Native method retained; numeric preference is not a probability or performance benchmark.", "Architecture proposals have no published canonical source; framework facts retain their original cutoff."], "payload_json": "{\"gateCritical\": true, \"id\": \"data_control\", \"label\": \"Data control and residency\", \"options\": [{\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Attach the approved data-flow, retention terms and deletion test.\", \"id\": \"buy\", \"interpretation\": \"A shortlisted vendor can meet documented handling and residency requirements.\", \"label\": \"Approved vendor path exists\", \"value\": -1}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Draw the trust boundary and identify which fields may cross it.\", \"id\": \"hybrid\", \"interpretation\": \"Commodity services are acceptable outside a controlled data and policy boundary.\", \"label\": \"Sensitive boundary can be isolated\", \"value\": 0}, {\"blocks\": [\"BUY\"], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Cite the binding policy, regulation or security decision and the failed vendor requirement.\", \"id\": \"build\", \"interpretation\": \"No approved vendor route currently meets a mandatory data-control constraint.\", \"label\": \"Controlled custom path required\", \"value\": 1}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Complete data classification and a vendor data-flow review.\", \"id\": \"unknown\", \"interpretation\": \"Data classification or vendor handling is unresolved.\", \"label\": \"Unknown\", \"value\": null}], \"order\": 3, \"question\": \"Can an approved vendor path meet data location, retention, deletion and training-use constraints?\", \"weight\": 3, \"whyItMatters\": \"A mandatory control that the shortlist cannot meet disqualifies a pure buy decision regardless of feature fit.\"}", "record_id": "data_control", "record_type": "WEIGHTED_CRITERION", "review_status": "NOT_REVIEWED", "snapshot_at": "2026-09-17T06:17:24Z", "source_commit_sha": "c8ad4067654a6777cea3b652a80f62dc6aeb21fb", "source_data_hash": "sha256:baa562980cf07255e2bf4fa1fded945dadaffcb7726abf7f7d07313d2d506cbd", "source_url": "https://github.com/PharosProduction/build-vs-buy-ai-agent-scorecard/blob/c8ad4067654a6777cea3b652a80f62dc6aeb21fb/data/criteria.json", "status": "DRAFT", "verified_at": null} |
| {"config": "build_buy", "decision_job": "PATH_SELECTION", "limitations": ["Native method retained; numeric preference is not a probability or performance benchmark.", "Architecture proposals have no published canonical source; framework facts retain their original cutoff."], "payload_json": "{\"gateCritical\": false, \"id\": \"integration_depth\", \"label\": \"Integration depth\", \"options\": [{\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Verify the exact objects, permissions and rate limits in the vendor connector.\", \"id\": \"buy\", \"interpretation\": \"The use case relies on supported connectors and limited read-oriented access.\", \"label\": \"Standard connectors and reads\", \"value\": -1}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Identify the crown-jewel integrations and keep their contracts portable.\", \"id\": \"hybrid\", \"interpretation\": \"Common systems are covered, but one or more integrations require owned adapters.\", \"label\": \"Mixed connector depth\", \"value\": 0}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Map identity, authorization, idempotency, rollback and reconciliation for each action.\", \"id\": \"build\", \"interpretation\": \"The agent needs legacy access, custom APIs, transactional writes or organization-specific recovery.\", \"label\": \"Deep custom transaction paths\", \"value\": 1}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Inventory systems, actions, permissions, error modes and data owners.\", \"id\": \"unknown\", \"interpretation\": \"The integration inventory is incomplete.\", \"label\": \"Unknown\", \"value\": null}], \"order\": 4, \"question\": \"How deeply must the agent interact with systems, permissions and failure recovery?\", \"weight\": 3, \"whyItMatters\": \"Connector count alone is weak evidence. Permission fidelity, write actions and recovery semantics drive integration ownership.\"}", "record_id": "integration_depth", "record_type": "WEIGHTED_CRITERION", "review_status": "NOT_REVIEWED", "snapshot_at": "2026-09-17T06:17:24Z", "source_commit_sha": "c8ad4067654a6777cea3b652a80f62dc6aeb21fb", "source_data_hash": "sha256:baa562980cf07255e2bf4fa1fded945dadaffcb7726abf7f7d07313d2d506cbd", "source_url": "https://github.com/PharosProduction/build-vs-buy-ai-agent-scorecard/blob/c8ad4067654a6777cea3b652a80f62dc6aeb21fb/data/criteria.json", "status": "DRAFT", "verified_at": null} |
| {"config": "build_buy", "decision_job": "PATH_SELECTION", "limitations": ["Native method retained; numeric preference is not a probability or performance benchmark.", "Architecture proposals have no published canonical source; framework facts retain their original cutoff."], "payload_json": "{\"gateCritical\": false, \"id\": \"time_to_value\", \"label\": \"Time to validated value\", \"options\": [{\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Name the decision deadline and the KPI that must be measured by then.\", \"id\": \"buy\", \"interpretation\": \"The business needs a production-like baseline before a custom platform could be staffed and built.\", \"label\": \"Evidence needed immediately\", \"value\": -1}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Define the first reversible slice and the later migration gate.\", \"id\": \"hybrid\", \"interpretation\": \"A vendor or open component can establish a baseline while custom boundaries are validated.\", \"label\": \"Phased evidence window\", \"value\": 0}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Confirm staffing dates, release gates and the cost of delayed learning.\", \"id\": \"build\", \"interpretation\": \"The roadmap can absorb iterative architecture, evaluation and operating-model work.\", \"label\": \"Longer validation horizon\", \"value\": 1}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Set a business deadline and a production-like validation target.\", \"id\": \"unknown\", \"interpretation\": \"No decision deadline or measurable outcome is agreed.\", \"label\": \"Unknown\", \"value\": null}], \"order\": 5, \"question\": \"How soon must a production-like workflow produce measurable evidence?\", \"weight\": 3, \"whyItMatters\": \"Urgency favors a configurable baseline, while a longer decision window can support owned architecture and repeated evaluation.\"}", "record_id": "time_to_value", "record_type": "WEIGHTED_CRITERION", "review_status": "NOT_REVIEWED", "snapshot_at": "2026-09-17T06:17:24Z", "source_commit_sha": "c8ad4067654a6777cea3b652a80f62dc6aeb21fb", "source_data_hash": "sha256:baa562980cf07255e2bf4fa1fded945dadaffcb7726abf7f7d07313d2d506cbd", "source_url": "https://github.com/PharosProduction/build-vs-buy-ai-agent-scorecard/blob/c8ad4067654a6777cea3b652a80f62dc6aeb21fb/data/criteria.json", "status": "DRAFT", "verified_at": null} |
| {"config": "build_buy", "decision_job": "PATH_SELECTION", "limitations": ["Native method retained; numeric preference is not a probability or performance benchmark.", "Architecture proposals have no published canonical source; framework facts retain their original cutoff."], "payload_json": "{\"gateCritical\": true, \"id\": \"team_capability\", \"label\": \"Engineering and product capability\", \"options\": [{\"blocks\": [\"BUILD\"], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Record the unfilled roles and the opportunity cost of reallocating staff.\", \"id\": \"buy\", \"interpretation\": \"The organization cannot assign a durable cross-functional owner team.\", \"label\": \"No dedicated build team\", \"value\": -1}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Assign owners for product, platform, data, security and evaluation.\", \"id\": \"hybrid\", \"interpretation\": \"Internal engineers can own integration and domain logic while buying missing platform capability.\", \"label\": \"Strong software team, selective gaps\", \"value\": 0}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Name the people, allocation, prior systems and on-call plan.\", \"id\": \"build\", \"interpretation\": \"A durable team has relevant delivery and operating experience.\", \"label\": \"Experienced agent delivery team\", \"value\": 1}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Replace role names with named owners and committed capacity.\", \"id\": \"unknown\", \"interpretation\": \"Staffing is hypothetical.\", \"label\": \"Unknown\", \"value\": null}], \"order\": 6, \"question\": \"Can a named internal team design, test and evolve the agent beyond a prototype?\", \"weight\": 3, \"whyItMatters\": \"Build capacity includes product ownership, data engineering, security and evaluation, not only prompt or application code.\"}", "record_id": "team_capability", "record_type": "WEIGHTED_CRITERION", "review_status": "NOT_REVIEWED", "snapshot_at": "2026-09-17T06:17:24Z", "source_commit_sha": "c8ad4067654a6777cea3b652a80f62dc6aeb21fb", "source_data_hash": "sha256:baa562980cf07255e2bf4fa1fded945dadaffcb7726abf7f7d07313d2d506cbd", "source_url": "https://github.com/PharosProduction/build-vs-buy-ai-agent-scorecard/blob/c8ad4067654a6777cea3b652a80f62dc6aeb21fb/data/criteria.json", "status": "DRAFT", "verified_at": null} |
| {"config": "build_buy", "decision_job": "PATH_SELECTION", "limitations": ["Native method retained; numeric preference is not a probability or performance benchmark.", "Architecture proposals have no published canonical source; framework facts retain their original cutoff."], "payload_json": "{\"gateCritical\": true, \"id\": \"lifecycle_capacity\", \"label\": \"Lifecycle ownership\", \"options\": [{\"blocks\": [\"BUILD\"], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Confirm what the vendor operates and what remains your responsibility.\", \"id\": \"buy\", \"interpretation\": \"The organization needs a vendor to carry much of the platform lifecycle.\", \"label\": \"Need managed lifecycle coverage\", \"value\": -1}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Create a RACI for monitoring, changes, incidents, data and access.\", \"id\": \"hybrid\", \"interpretation\": \"The vendor runs commodity layers while the organization owns domain quality and incidents.\", \"label\": \"Shared operating model\", \"value\": 0}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Attach the evaluation cadence, on-call rota, rollback path and change policy.\", \"id\": \"build\", \"interpretation\": \"The organization can own releases, regressions, infrastructure and incident response.\", \"label\": \"Full internal lifecycle team\", \"value\": 1}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Assign durable owners before approving a build.\", \"id\": \"unknown\", \"interpretation\": \"No operating owner has accepted responsibility.\", \"label\": \"Unknown\", \"value\": null}], \"order\": 7, \"question\": \"Who will operate evaluation, monitoring, incidents and model or vendor changes?\", \"weight\": 3, \"whyItMatters\": \"The sourcing choice changes the work, but it never removes responsibility for outcomes and controls.\"}", "record_id": "lifecycle_capacity", "record_type": "WEIGHTED_CRITERION", "review_status": "NOT_REVIEWED", "snapshot_at": "2026-09-17T06:17:24Z", "source_commit_sha": "c8ad4067654a6777cea3b652a80f62dc6aeb21fb", "source_data_hash": "sha256:baa562980cf07255e2bf4fa1fded945dadaffcb7726abf7f7d07313d2d506cbd", "source_url": "https://github.com/PharosProduction/build-vs-buy-ai-agent-scorecard/blob/c8ad4067654a6777cea3b652a80f62dc6aeb21fb/data/criteria.json", "status": "DRAFT", "verified_at": null} |
| {"config": "build_buy", "decision_job": "PATH_SELECTION", "limitations": ["Native method retained; numeric preference is not a probability or performance benchmark.", "Architecture proposals have no published canonical source; framework facts retain their original cutoff."], "payload_json": "{\"gateCritical\": false, \"id\": \"capital_shape\", \"label\": \"Budget and capital shape\", \"options\": [{\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Record approved setup spend, recurring spend and procurement limits.\", \"id\": \"buy\", \"interpretation\": \"Subscription or usage spend is easier to approve than a larger internal build.\", \"label\": \"Lower initial commitment\", \"value\": -1}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Separate vendor, integration, internal labor and contingency budgets.\", \"id\": \"hybrid\", \"interpretation\": \"The budget can fund a platform and a bounded custom layer.\", \"label\": \"Balanced spend profile\", \"value\": 0}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Verify capital, headcount and contingency approvals.\", \"id\": \"build\", \"interpretation\": \"The organization can fund discovery, engineering and operating capability before benefits stabilize.\", \"label\": \"Front-loaded investment is approved\", \"value\": 1}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Get separate approval ranges for one-time and recurring spend.\", \"id\": \"unknown\", \"interpretation\": \"Budget shape is not approved.\", \"label\": \"Unknown\", \"value\": null}], \"order\": 8, \"question\": \"Does the organization prefer lower initial commitment or controlled long-term investment?\", \"weight\": 2, \"whyItMatters\": \"The same nominal budget can produce different decisions depending on cash timing and approved headcount.\"}", "record_id": "capital_shape", "record_type": "WEIGHTED_CRITERION", "review_status": "NOT_REVIEWED", "snapshot_at": "2026-09-17T06:17:24Z", "source_commit_sha": "c8ad4067654a6777cea3b652a80f62dc6aeb21fb", "source_data_hash": "sha256:baa562980cf07255e2bf4fa1fded945dadaffcb7726abf7f7d07313d2d506cbd", "source_url": "https://github.com/PharosProduction/build-vs-buy-ai-agent-scorecard/blob/c8ad4067654a6777cea3b652a80f62dc6aeb21fb/data/criteria.json", "status": "DRAFT", "verified_at": null} |
| {"config": "build_buy", "decision_job": "PATH_SELECTION", "limitations": ["Native method retained; numeric preference is not a probability or performance benchmark.", "Architecture proposals have no published canonical source; framework facts retain their original cutoff."], "payload_json": "{\"gateCritical\": false, \"id\": \"scale_economics\", \"label\": \"Scale and unit economics\", \"options\": [{\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Define the unit of work and a bounded adoption range.\", \"id\": \"buy\", \"interpretation\": \"The organization benefits from avoiding fixed platform investment while demand is unproven.\", \"label\": \"Demand is uncertain or modest\", \"value\": -1}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Track cost per successful task, active user, action and exception.\", \"id\": \"hybrid\", \"interpretation\": \"Usage can be measured, but the economic crossover requires a live baseline.\", \"label\": \"Scale is measurable, crossover unclear\", \"value\": 0}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Show demand, peak shape, growth assumptions and cost per successful outcome.\", \"id\": \"build\", \"interpretation\": \"Stable high volume can justify owned cost controls and reusable platform work.\", \"label\": \"High predictable scale\", \"value\": 1}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Define a measurable unit and collect a baseline.\", \"id\": \"unknown\", \"interpretation\": \"No unit or demand model exists.\", \"label\": \"Unknown\", \"value\": null}], \"order\": 9, \"question\": \"Are demand, workload units and marginal costs measurable enough to compare paths?\", \"weight\": 2, \"whyItMatters\": \"A low pilot price says little about per-user, per-task or per-action economics at production scale.\"}", "record_id": "scale_economics", "record_type": "WEIGHTED_CRITERION", "review_status": "NOT_REVIEWED", "snapshot_at": "2026-09-17T06:17:24Z", "source_commit_sha": "c8ad4067654a6777cea3b652a80f62dc6aeb21fb", "source_data_hash": "sha256:baa562980cf07255e2bf4fa1fded945dadaffcb7726abf7f7d07313d2d506cbd", "source_url": "https://github.com/PharosProduction/build-vs-buy-ai-agent-scorecard/blob/c8ad4067654a6777cea3b652a80f62dc6aeb21fb/data/criteria.json", "status": "DRAFT", "verified_at": null} |
| {"config": "build_buy", "decision_job": "PATH_SELECTION", "limitations": ["Native method retained; numeric preference is not a probability or performance benchmark.", "Architecture proposals have no published canonical source; framework facts retain their original cutoff."], "payload_json": "{\"gateCritical\": false, \"id\": \"portability_tolerance\", \"label\": \"Portability and vendor dependency\", \"options\": [{\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Record renewal, export, termination assistance and deletion terms.\", \"id\": \"buy\", \"interpretation\": \"The organization accepts a managed platform dependency with bounded exit terms.\", \"label\": \"Contractual dependency is acceptable\", \"value\": -1}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Run an export and redeploy test for the assets that must remain yours.\", \"id\": \"hybrid\", \"interpretation\": \"Domain logic, data and evals remain portable while replaceable services are bought.\", \"label\": \"Portable core, managed shell\", \"value\": 0}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"List every asset needed to operate after vendor account termination.\", \"id\": \"build\", \"interpretation\": \"The organization needs control over runtime boundaries and migration paths.\", \"label\": \"High portability requirement\", \"value\": 1}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Write an exit scenario before vendor selection or platform build.\", \"id\": \"unknown\", \"interpretation\": \"Exit requirements are undefined.\", \"label\": \"Unknown\", \"value\": null}], \"order\": 10, \"question\": \"What must remain movable if the model, platform or commercial terms change?\", \"weight\": 2, \"whyItMatters\": \"Code ownership is incomplete when prompts, evals, state, logs or deployment cannot leave the vendor runtime.\"}", "record_id": "portability_tolerance", "record_type": "WEIGHTED_CRITERION", "review_status": "NOT_REVIEWED", "snapshot_at": "2026-09-17T06:17:24Z", "source_commit_sha": "c8ad4067654a6777cea3b652a80f62dc6aeb21fb", "source_data_hash": "sha256:baa562980cf07255e2bf4fa1fded945dadaffcb7726abf7f7d07313d2d506cbd", "source_url": "https://github.com/PharosProduction/build-vs-buy-ai-agent-scorecard/blob/c8ad4067654a6777cea3b652a80f62dc6aeb21fb/data/criteria.json", "status": "DRAFT", "verified_at": null} |
| {"config": "build_buy", "decision_job": "PATH_SELECTION", "limitations": ["Native method retained; numeric preference is not a probability or performance benchmark.", "Architecture proposals have no published canonical source; framework facts retain their original cutoff."], "payload_json": "{\"gateCritical\": false, \"id\": \"evaluation_control\", \"label\": \"Evaluation and observability control\", \"options\": [{\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Verify each required artifact in a production-like trial.\", \"id\": \"buy\", \"interpretation\": \"The platform exposes the required traces, eval hooks, exports and release controls.\", \"label\": \"Vendor evidence is sufficient\", \"value\": -1}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Keep test data, metrics and release criteria outside the vendor-only surface.\", \"id\": \"hybrid\", \"interpretation\": \"The platform can be wrapped by an organization-owned test and observability layer.\", \"label\": \"Own evals around a bought runtime\", \"value\": 0}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Name the failure taxonomy, test set, trace fields and stop conditions.\", \"id\": \"build\", \"interpretation\": \"The use case needs custom evaluation, traces or action-level controls unavailable from products.\", \"label\": \"Domain-specific evidence is central\", \"value\": 1}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Define what must be observable before comparing vendors or architectures.\", \"id\": \"unknown\", \"interpretation\": \"The evidence contract is not defined.\", \"label\": \"Unknown\", \"value\": null}], \"order\": 11, \"question\": \"Can a bought product expose the evidence needed to test domain quality and actions?\", \"weight\": 2, \"whyItMatters\": \"A system cannot be governed from a demo score. Teams need test sets, traces, failure labels and release gates tied to their own workflow.\"}", "record_id": "evaluation_control", "record_type": "WEIGHTED_CRITERION", "review_status": "NOT_REVIEWED", "snapshot_at": "2026-09-17T06:17:24Z", "source_commit_sha": "c8ad4067654a6777cea3b652a80f62dc6aeb21fb", "source_data_hash": "sha256:baa562980cf07255e2bf4fa1fded945dadaffcb7726abf7f7d07313d2d506cbd", "source_url": "https://github.com/PharosProduction/build-vs-buy-ai-agent-scorecard/blob/c8ad4067654a6777cea3b652a80f62dc6aeb21fb/data/criteria.json", "status": "DRAFT", "verified_at": null} |
| {"config": "build_buy", "decision_job": "PATH_SELECTION", "limitations": ["Native method retained; numeric preference is not a probability or performance benchmark.", "Architecture proposals have no published canonical source; framework facts retain their original cutoff."], "payload_json": "{\"gateCritical\": true, \"id\": \"compliance_path\", \"label\": \"Compliance and third-party path\", \"options\": [{\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Attach the approved control matrix, contracts and residual-risk owner.\", \"id\": \"buy\", \"interpretation\": \"A vendor route can satisfy documented procurement, security and compliance gates.\", \"label\": \"Approved vendor controls fit\", \"value\": -1}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Map each obligation to the vendor, internal owner or shared process.\", \"id\": \"hybrid\", \"interpretation\": \"The path needs vendor evidence plus organization-owned controls and records.\", \"label\": \"Control boundary must be shared\", \"value\": 0}, {\"blocks\": [\"BUY\"], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Cite the failed gate and the evidence a controlled build must produce.\", \"id\": \"build\", \"interpretation\": \"A mandatory approval or control cannot be met by the current vendor shortlist.\", \"label\": \"Custom controlled path required\", \"value\": 1}, {\"blocks\": [], \"evidencePrompt\": \"Get legal, security and risk owners to classify the use case.\", \"id\": \"unknown\", \"interpretation\": \"The applicable obligations or approval route are unresolved.\", \"label\": \"Unknown\", \"value\": null}], \"order\": 12, \"question\": \"Which sourcing path can produce the required approvals, records and accountability?\", \"weight\": 2, \"whyItMatters\": \"A vendor certification does not transfer accountability. A custom build also creates documentation and control obligations.\"}", "record_id": "compliance_path", "record_type": "WEIGHTED_CRITERION", "review_status": "NOT_REVIEWED", "snapshot_at": "2026-09-17T06:17:24Z", "source_commit_sha": "c8ad4067654a6777cea3b652a80f62dc6aeb21fb", "source_data_hash": "sha256:baa562980cf07255e2bf4fa1fded945dadaffcb7726abf7f7d07313d2d506cbd", "source_url": "https://github.com/PharosProduction/build-vs-buy-ai-agent-scorecard/blob/c8ad4067654a6777cea3b652a80f62dc6aeb21fb/data/criteria.json", "status": "DRAFT", "verified_at": null} |
|
|
