What gets recorded

Every run records where it came from and what it produced, step by step

Every run leaves a trace per step: which file went in, what each stage produced, what failed and why, how much it cost. Lineage is a column, not a convention: *this file came from that one* is verifiable by query, not by trust. Failed work is recorded too, and billed the same as work that passed, which is the hardest claim on this page to fake. Comparing versions is the part of the trace used most, and it is counted:

1,901Comparison findings, counted across the four formats267 in PPTX, 167 in DOCX, 338 in XLSX, and 1,129 in PDF, across fourteen comparison runs. It is not a sample or an estimate: it is what the engine recorded, and the number comes back the same for anyone who repeats the query.

Measured against our own database on 2026-08-28. This page's receipt is the page itself: the number is here because it can be reproduced.

The full trace of a document, the X-ray, the editions, and what each receipt proves, is in [your documents](documents).

The receipt has a boundary

How far lineage covers, and exactly where it stops

Lineage follows every passage of text until it leaves for the language model, and picks back up when it returns. No table of ours records what happened on the other side. Anyone who asks *prove what was done with my text inside the model* receives the retention terms of the provider they contracted, and in an installation of your own the provider is your choice. Stating where the receipt ends is part of the receipt, and it is the sentence this page exists to never leave unsaid.

the provider begins here

covered by lineageupload, extraction, measurement, editing, outputoutside our boundarytext sent to the model follows the provider's terms

The line breaks on purpose. An unbroken line here would say in geometry what the sentence is not allowed to say.

The properties you audit

Where the data lives, what leaves your zone, and what deletion proves

Permanent storage does not hold document content: it holds structure, measurement, and lineage, and the way to check that is not to read a policy, it is to audit the schema. Deletion here is called withdrawal, because erasure would claim a reach that no system with backups and providers in the path can sustain, and changing the word was cheaper than sustaining the promise. The full argument, the schema, the two boundaries of the control zone, deletion with proof, and portability, live in [privacy and sovereignty](privacy).

The platform underneath

Written decisions, methodical validation, and the roadmap with no verb in the present tense

Every capability answers three questions: is there a written decision that governs it, is there a measurement, or does it simply work without anyone having written down why. What passes the first two is a receipt; the rest is declared as direction, dated and with no verb in the present tense. The decisions, the references behind each block, and the roadmap of what does not exist yet are in [platform](platform).

What we recommend you do not do here

A product contract needs a declared end

Do not use SazAI to reconstruct a document's structure: the engine changes content inside the structure that already exists, and does not create, delete, or reorder units. Do not treat assisted creation as final delivery: it is the least mature operation in the set and requires human review. Do not count on PDF translation into every language: targets the design does not yet support are refused or flagged at selection, never after delivery. Do not expect automatic visual verification: the system measures structure and counts elements, and the last look at the page is human. And do not use the receipts as certified audit: they are evidence of control, and whether they close a formal requirement in your sector is a case by case conversation, with the requirement on the table. Refusing in silence is worse than warning. A limit that stops existing leaves here with a date, and becomes a line on the page that mediates it.

Prove it, do not take our word

Five things you can demand before signing anything

Five things you can demand in an evaluation, and none of them depend on our word: the receipt of a delivery of yours, item by item; the lineage of which file produced what; the schema, to audit where the data lives; the boundary, declared by us and not discovered by you; and the withdrawal, executed, with what it does not reach. Ask for the export and open it in your own tool; ask for a key and call the API yourself; upload a document of your own, translate and compare it, and get the count before and after. If any one of these cannot be carried out in an evaluation of your own, that is a defect of ours, and we want to know before you do.

The receiptof a delivery of yours, item by item

The lineageof which file produced what

The schemato audit where the data lives

The boundarydeclared, not discovered by you

The withdrawalexecuted, and what it does not reach

Five demands, and none of them ask for trust.

Whoever answers is whoever builds, and there is one address: [contact](contact). This is what the other four verbs stand on: what you [see](see), [ask](talk), [translate](translate), and are about to [create](create) passes through here and leaves a trace.