Reliability maturity
A workflow can be strong in one area and weak in another. Use these stages as questions to investigate, rather than a certification or a measured market ranking.
Explore Tensile ↗
Keep one record per workflow.
For every answer, record the source, owner, date, current gap and next check. Unknown is a useful answer. There is no automatic saving on this page.
01 / Define the job
What exact customer result is expected, for whom and by when?
Capture the input, intended owner, authoritative result and completion condition.
Inspect the product area ↗
02 / Find the affected work
Which jobs failed, and what portion of the source is visible?
Record job IDs, agent versions, time window, exclusions and source freshness.
Inspect the product area ↗
03 / Explain the gap
Where did expected behavior diverge from observed behavior?
Link source evidence to the hypothesis; keep missing evidence and owner decisions explicit.
Inspect the product area ↗
04 / Retain the expectation
What reusable check would catch this failure without rejecting correct work?
Include positive cases, counterexamples, policy scope and an independently reviewed expectation.
Inspect the product area ↗
05 / Challenge the fix
Can baseline and candidate face equivalent tools, identities, permissions and starting state?
Test timeouts, denied access and retries. Inspect saved effects and forbidden attempted actions.
Inspect the product area ↗
06 / Verify the result
What proves the original customer job reached the intended outcome?
Read authoritative state, connect recovery and handoffs, and retain unknown where proof is missing.
Inspect the product area ↗
Bring the workflow and the evidence gap.
We can start with an affected customer job and the result your team needs to establish.
Discuss a concrete workflow ↗
AI reliability, from production to customer outcome.