Source: https://guthlabs.ai/docs/jobs/tilly-grant-research-and-drafts/forms/ job / candidate # Grant research and drafts โ€” forms The distinct forms record for Grant research and drafts. This page is proposal-only. Status: **proposed**Lifecycle: **candidate** ## Record status **Record ID**: job:tilly:grant-research-and-drafts **Parent lifecycle**: candidate **Page lane**: package **Lane lifecycle**: proposed **Owner**: Tilly **Owner role**: Pointguard and independent reviewer **Owner status**: WORKING **Qualification result**: NOT RUN ยท held for evidence and human review **Working browser surface:** [Agent jobs โ€” builder overview]() โ€” Inspect the package and stage a local project. This route is local-only; provider, credential, database, customer, publication, deployment, and production effects remain held. ## Proposed form sections Each section is a candidate schema for inspectable records. Required-field presence does not establish factual truth. ### Research brief Define the grant-search or drafting request and its boundaries. - request title - requesting agent or person - funding area - applicant or project name - geographic or eligibility scope - requested output - known deadline - source policy - sensitive information warning ### Grant opportunity Capture source-backed opportunity details without treating an index as a live funding connection. - opportunity name - funder name - official source locator - source access date - source SHA-256 if available - application URL or locator - opening date - deadline date and time zone - award range - eligibility summary - required attachments - funder contact as quoted - status: proposed, researching, qualified, held, closed ### Qualification check Separate explicit requirements from unresolved interpretation. - requirement text - requirement category - evidence citation - applicant evidence record - meets, does not meet, unclear, or not checked - missing evidence - contradiction or ambiguity - reviewer notes - qualification decision - decision owner ### Evidence and claims Build traceable receipts for every material assertion. - claim text - claim type - source locator - quoted support - source date - source SHA-256 if available - confidence or evidence state - contradictory evidence - claim examiner disposition - public-claim status: held or allowed ### Grant draft Prepare application language that remains tied to reviewed evidence. - section name - draft text - intended audience - linked project record - linked evidence records - word or character limit - assumptions - open questions - revision number - draft status ### Review and handoff Record independent review and explicit approval boundaries. - reviewer - review scope - issues found - claims exceeding receipts - required corrections - owner response - approval state: needs review, approved, or held - final publication decision owner - funding commitment decision owner - handoff receipt ### Accessible state contract - Every field requires a visible and programmatic label. - Required and optional fields must be stated in text. - Invalid entries require an actionable message linked to the field. - Blocked and Held states remain visible without relying on color alone. ## Supporting documentation fields These fields come from the docs_urls lane and remain separate from the primary operating form. ### Job scope and ownership Define the research request, accountable owner, reviewer role, and boundaries before work begins. - job title - requestor - owner agent - owner role - objective - scope in - scope out - status - source reference - linked project ### Grant opportunity intake Capture the opportunity as a source-bound dossier without implying eligibility, submission, or funding. - grant name - funder - opportunity URL or source locator - application deadline - time zone - eligibility requirements - required documents - funding amount or range as stated - matching or cost-share requirement - open questions ### Evidence and qualification review Record receipts, claims, qualification checks, contradictions, and unresolved gaps separately. - claim text - source locator - source SHA-256 when available - citation or quotation - evidence status - qualification criterion - qualification result - contradiction flag - reviewer - review notes - revision ### Draft preparation Create a controlled draft whose assertions remain traceable to reviewed evidence. - draft type - intended audience - section outline - claim IDs - required attachments - plain-language summary - assumptions - unsupported language to remove - draft status - revision ### Review and release gates Prevent self-approval, hidden contradictions, premature public claims, funding commitments, or credential access. - independent reviewer - review decision - approval state - publication state - funding-commitment state - credential-access state - change-to-another-agent-source state - receipt bundle - held reason ## Required or proposed record references No record existence is asserted by this documentation page. - source-labelled research notes - citation-check receipts - grant opportunity record - qualification record - grant dossier - draft application materials - claim examination record - deadline and workback to-dos - review and approval record - agent log - job record - source-labelled notes - claim and receipt records - qualification records - grant dossier records - draft records - approval records - deadline to-dos ## Sources and evidence These pointers bind the page to evidence. They do not grant authority or collapse verification into deployment. - `agents/index.html#tilly` - `source_record:job:tilly:grant-research-and-drafts` - `native contract: records preserve canonical IDs, origin, source locators, source SHA-256, provenance, revision, lifecycle, tags, links, attachments, and record revisions` - `native contract: PointGuard is a persistent cross-app context surface; specialist apps remain execution and canonical-record owners` - `native contract: current GuthHub app routes are local prototypes or indexes; provider, credential, database, customer, publication, and production effects are held` - `source record existing tools: Pointguard; Instrument catalog; Claim examiner; Citation checks` - `source record existing guides: Instrument packets; Qualification records; Grant dossiers; Public-claim routes` - `source record principal gates: Final publication; Funding commitments; Credential access; Changes to another agent's source` - `source record never rules: Approve her own evidence; Hide a contradiction; Turn a draft into a public claim` - `job:tilly:grant-research-and-drafts` - `Observed native contract: Notebook records and revisions` - `Observed native contract: PointGuard persistent cross-app context surface` - `Observed app routes: /app/pointguard/, /app/notebook/field-guides/, /app/notebook/approvals/, /app/notebook/paper/, /app/notebook/agent-logs/`