Internal Buyer Proof Desk prototype

Route alias: /example-proof-desk/ is the canonical anonymized review route. /greenwrap-demo/ remains only as a backward-compatible internal alias.

A fictional packaging company becomes evidence-backed proof work.

This local route uses a fictional packaging company to show the product workflow: claim queue, Evidence Room, Evidence Burden, Risk Queue, safer wording, approval gates, Proof Card previews, and Drift Monitor records.

Boundary: ProofForge does not certify claims, provide legal advice, publish externally, or approve compliance. It prepares traceable work for human, counsel, or verifier review.

Review claim queue

3claims captured
12evidence items mapped
11evidence gaps found
1blocked claim
6freshness and caveat states tracked

GW-C001 | Certification

Our mailers are home compostable.

Normalized: Example mailer SKU EX-MAILER-01 is home compostable under the tested configuration.

82Readiness
Risk: mediumStatus: Approval requestedSurface: sales deck

Evidence Room

  • Certificate
    Certificate supports home compostability for tested SKU only.
    Support: strong | Review: reviewed | Freshness: expiring soon

Risk Queue

medium risk

Certificate validity date must be shown before buyer use.

Action: Add expiry date and source owner to proof card.

Safer buyer wording draft

Example mailer SKU EX-MAILER-01 is certified home compostable under [standard] for the tested configuration. Certificate valid through [date]. Other products require separate confirmation.

This is draft or revision-needed language until a human owner approves it.

Approval Gate

compliance: needs revision

Required owner: compliance_owner. No claim in this demo is marked approved for external use.

Proof Card preview

Home compostable mailer proof card

Buyer question: Is the mailer actually certified home compostable?

Evidence summary: Certificate and lab summary support the tested SKU, with scope caveats.

Source labels: Home compostability certificate

Caveats

  • tested SKU only
  • expiry date required

Open questions

  • Which standard and expiration date apply?

Source Freshness Tracker

Status: expiring soon

Certificate source appears current but expiry date is missing from buyer-facing wording.

Action: Add certificate expiry date, issuing body, and owner before external use.

Next review: 2026-05-23

Caveat Tracker

External validation state: external validation referenced, scope needs confirmation

Owner confirmation: compliance owner must confirm standard, SKU scope, and expiry

  • tested SKU only
  • standard and expiry date must be visible
  • other products require separate confirmation

Procurement Q&A Drilldown

Buyer-facing answers stay draft until the named human owner approves the claim, caveats, and source freshness state.

Can procurement rely on the home compostable claim this week?

Not yet for external use. The certificate supports the tested SKU, but the expiry date, standard name, issuing body, and SKU scope need to be visible before a buyer-facing answer is approved.

Owner ask: Compliance owner confirms standard, expiry, SKU scope, and approved wording.

Evidence action: Attach certificate source, expiry date, and source owner to the proof card.

What should sales say if the buyer asks whether all products are compostable?

Sales should limit the answer to the tested mailer SKU only. Other products require separate confirmation and should not inherit the compostability claim.

Owner ask: Product or compliance owner lists which SKUs are covered and which are excluded.

Evidence action: Add a product-scope caveat to the Proof Card and buyer FAQ.

Drift Monitor

Certificate Expiry

Status: active | Next scan: 2026-06-16

certificate expiry date missing from buyer wording

GW-C002 | Emissions

62 percent lower emissions than plastic.

Normalized: the example company estimates lower cradle-to-gate emissions than a specific virgin plastic mailer comparator.

54Readiness
Risk: highStatus: BlockedSurface: website

Evidence Room

  • Lca
    Internal model estimates emissions reduction, but comparator and methodology need review.
    Support: partial | Review: needs owner | Freshness: unknown

Risk Queue

high risk

Comparator, boundary, method version, uncertainty range, and review status are missing.

Action: Keep claim blocked until methodology owner provides reviewed assumptions.

Safer buyer wording draft

Draft only: Based on an internal cradle-to-gate analysis for [product SKU] using [method/version], the example company estimates lower emissions than [specific comparator] under modeled assumptions. Methodology review required before external use.

This is draft or revision-needed language until a human owner approves it.

Approval Gate

No approval record yet. External use blocked.

Required owner: methodology_owner. No claim in this demo is marked approved for external use.

Proof Card preview

Emissions comparison proof card

Buyer question: Can the example company substantiate the 62 percent emissions claim?

Evidence summary: Internal LCA model is incomplete for external use.

Source labels: Internal LCA spreadsheet

Caveats

  • methodology review required

Open questions

  • What comparator, boundary, date, uncertainty range, and review status apply?

Source Freshness Tracker

Status: unknown

Internal LCA source lacks method version, date, comparator, and reviewer status.

Action: Keep blocked until methodology owner supplies current reviewed assumptions.

Next review: owner required before next buyer use

Caveat Tracker

External validation state: external validation needed before quantified emissions comparison

Owner confirmation: methodology owner has not confirmed comparator or uncertainty range

  • modeled estimate only
  • method version missing
  • comparator and uncertainty range required

Procurement Q&A Drilldown

Buyer-facing answers stay draft until the named human owner approves the claim, caveats, and source freshness state.

Can the 62 percent lower emissions number go into a proposal?

No. The number stays blocked until comparator, boundary, method version, uncertainty range, date, and reviewer status are documented.

Owner ask: Methodology owner supplies reviewed assumptions and either approves the claim or replaces it with a qualitative statement.

Evidence action: Create a methodology record and mark the claim as external validation needed before quantified use.

What buyer-safe answer can be used while the LCA is incomplete?

Use a process answer, not a performance number: the company is reviewing cradle-to-gate assumptions and will share method, comparator, and review status when available.

Owner ask: Marketing owner replaces exact reduction copy in live surfaces until review is complete.

Evidence action: Log every live surface where the exact percentage appears and assign cleanup.

Drift Monitor

Methodology Version

Status: alerting | Next scan: 2026-06-16

methodology version unknown

GW-C003 | Customer Outcome

The example company replaces virgin plastic packaging.

Normalized: example mailers replaced virgin plastic mailers for a defined customer program and date range.

71Readiness
Risk: mediumStatus: Risk reviewSurface: buyer faq

Evidence Room

  • Customer Record
    Purchase and implementation records support replacement in a defined customer program.
    Support: partial | Review: needs owner | Freshness: current

Risk Queue

medium risk

Replacement wording is too broad without date range, unit count, and customer permission.

Action: Limit wording to approved customer program and eligible shipment type.

Safer buyer wording draft

For [customer/program] between [date range], example mailers replaced virgin plastic mailers for [eligible shipment type], based on purchase order and implementation records reviewed by [owner].

This is draft or revision-needed language until a human owner approves it.

Approval Gate

customer_owner: needs revision

Required owner: customer_owner. No claim in this demo is marked approved for external use.

Proof Card preview

Virgin plastic replacement proof card

Buyer question: Where and when did the example company replace virgin plastic?

Evidence summary: Customer records support a defined replacement program but need permission and unit count.

Source labels: Customer implementation records

Caveats

  • customer permission required
  • date range required

Open questions

  • What program, eligible shipment type, and unit count are approved?

Source Freshness Tracker

Status: current, permission incomplete

Customer record source is current, but permission and approved date range are not recorded.

Action: Ask customer owner for permission, date range, unit count, and allowed wording.

Next review: 2026-05-23

Caveat Tracker

External validation state: external validation not required, customer permission required

Owner confirmation: customer owner must approve wording before publication

  • customer permission required
  • date range and eligible shipment type required
  • unit count missing

Procurement Q&A Drilldown

Buyer-facing answers stay draft until the named human owner approves the claim, caveats, and source freshness state.

Can we say the product replaces virgin plastic packaging?

Only for a named customer program, date range, eligible shipment type, and unit count after customer permission is recorded.

Owner ask: Customer owner confirms permission, program scope, date range, and approved quote or wording.

Evidence action: Attach purchase order, implementation record, and permission note to the Evidence Room.

What caveat belongs in the buyer answer?

The replacement claim is program-specific. It does not mean every shipment, customer, or product line replaced virgin plastic.

Owner ask: Sales owner confirms the exact buyer FAQ phrasing before use.

Evidence action: Add date range, denominator, and permission status to the Proof Card.

Drift Monitor

Customer Permission

Status: active | Next scan: 2026-06-16

permission not recorded