Guth
NewsDocs
Page actions
View as Markdown ↗
Explore MCP tools ↗

field guide / candidate

Grant dossiers — prerequisites

The distinct prerequisites record for Grant dossiers. This page is proposal-only.

Status: proposedLifecycle: candidate

Record status

Record ID
field-guide:grant-dossiers
Parent lifecycle
candidate
Page lane
plan
Lane lifecycle
proposed
Owner
Tilly
Owner role
Not separately recorded
Owner status
Not separately recorded
Qualification result
NOT RUN · held for evidence and human review

Working browser surface: Field guides — documentation — Inspect the guide and persist local checkpoints. This route is local-only; provider, credential, database, customer, publication, deployment, and production effects remain held.

Entry evidence and required records

Before the procedure starts, an operator must identify the source, owner, scope, and required records below. Missing evidence holds the guide.

  • source-labelled grant opportunity record
  • grant dossier project record
  • evidence records with source locator and SHA-256 where available
  • draft narrative or response records
  • deadline and workback to-do records
  • review and reconciliation notes
  • approval receipt record

Intended operators and ownership

  • Tilly
  • grant research and drafting agents
  • independent reviewers
  • evidence reviewers
  • human approvers

Being listed as an intended operator does not grant execution or publication authority.

Conditions that hold the guide before entry

  • A grant name or related job may be mistaken for proof that an opportunity is active, applicable, eligible, or qualified.
  • Copied requirements can lose source context, version, cutoff time, or amendment history.
  • Unsupported narrative claims may enter drafts through paraphrase or stale evidence.
  • Conflicting sources may be silently reconciled instead of preserved and escalated.
  • An internal workback date may be mistaken for the funder's deadline.
  • Local approval may be mistaken for external submission or funding approval.
  • Prototype routes may be mistaken for connected production features.
  • Sensitive application material may be placed in an unapproved file or visibility surface.
  • Accessibility failures may hide status, deadlines, errors, or held states.

Sources and evidence

These pointers bind the page to evidence. They do not grant authority or collapse verification into deployment.

  • source_record:field-guide:grant-dossiers
  • agents/index.html#tilly
  • Observed native contract: Notebook collections and lifecycle
  • Observed native contract: Notebook deadlines and workback payload
  • Observed native contract: provenance, canonical IDs, source locators, SHA-256, revisions, and attachments
  • Observed native contract: PointGuard context surface and specialist-app record ownership
  • Observed app routes supplied for Guth Hub, PointGuard, Notebook, Business, and related review surfaces
  • Allowed verified-instrument directory supplied; no instrument selected because this dossier procedure has no demonstrated calculation requirement