How an AI agent can prepare an investment memo that separates platform data from internal context
This workflow gives an AI agent a defined job, a bounded set of records, and a result a person can review. The agent reads the relevant Chronograph context and matches it with Google Drive, applies the rules in the prompt, and keeps the source behind every recommendation. It returns a proposed handoff rather than taking consequential actions on its own.
Can an AI agent prepare an investment memo that separates platform data from internal context?
Yes. Start with the scope, date range, decision rules, and fields that identify the right records. The agent can collect the evidence, compare states or sources, mark conflicts and missing data, and organize the result around the outcome above. A reviewer then checks the matches and judgment calls before approving messages, record updates, bookings, purchases, publishing, or other write actions. The guide below shows the records, boundaries, prompt, and handoff needed for this specific workflow.
Label every source class
Chronograph supplies structured fund, company, investment, and performance records. Google Drive supplies approved memos, models, operating reports, and committee notes. The agent should identify each source as platform data, company-reported material, internal analysis, or committee record.
Match entities with a stable investment or company identifier and verify the reporting period. A memo should not blend a current Chronograph value with an older Drive narrative without showing the date difference.
Example starter prompt
Prepare a memo for [investment question] using Chronograph entities [IDs] and approved Google Drive folder [link]. Use information available as of [date].
Cite every figure and material claim. Label each source as Chronograph data, company material, internal analysis, or committee record. Show period, currency, and units. Highlight conflicts, stale assumptions, missing evidence, and decisions requested. Do not create new forecasts or investment recommendations.Preserve disagreement
If an internal model, operating update, and Chronograph record disagree, show the values side by side with dates and definitions. The agent should not average them or select the most favorable figure. Route the discrepancy to the analyst who owns the assumption.
Questions this workflow answers
Can we prepare an investment memo without mixing reported portfolio data with our own forecasts and committee notes?
An agent can assemble a memo when every claim keeps its source class. Give it the investment question, entity identifiers, as-of date, measures, currency, and approved Drive folder. Chronograph contributes structured fund, company, valuation, and performance records. Drive contributes operating reports, models, prior memos, and committee decisions. The agent labels each figure as platform data, company-reported material, internal analysis, or committee record.
Before writing prose, it verifies entity and period alignment. Similar company names, different vehicles, and several share classes can create a false join. A current platform value should not sit beside a model from two quarters earlier without both dates and definitions. Derived figures include their formula and inputs. If units, currency, valuation date, or measure definitions differ, the item belongs in a comparability warning.
Disagreement remains part of the memo. Suppose Chronograph records a quarter-end valuation, the latest operating update cites a different metric, and the internal model uses a forecast. The agent presents all three with their dates and labels. It does not average them, choose the most favorable number, or turn the model into reported performance. The owning analyst receives a specific question about which value controls the decision.
The draft can organize factual summary, internal context, risks, conflicts, and decisions requested, but it cannot supply investment judgment. An analyst opens the source register, checks material claims, and writes the recommendation. The final document preserves the evidence trail for later review and shows which assumptions were current at the memo’s as-of date. Access and distribution continue to follow the permissions on the underlying materials.
If an internal model uses a different period or currency from the platform record, the memo keeps both values and explains the mismatch.
Expected handoff
Return an executive question, factual summary, evidence table, internal context, conflicts, risks, open questions, and source register. The analyst adds judgment and recommendation after reviewing the underlying records.