| RSK-001 | Technical feasibility is overpromised — full automatic 2D→3D reconstruction is research-grade | Framework documents promise AI-assisted 3D from 2D; ambition may exceed tractable engineering | 4 | 4 | HIGH | Narrow MVP slice (ACT-004); parametric/rule-based core with AI-assist where reliable; paid feasibility spike before outcome commitments | Zaid | Open |
| RSK-002 | Deal structure left undefined while work begins | Paid-vs-partnership undecided; unpriced hours accumulate silently | 4 | 3 | HIGH | Hard cap 20 unstructured hours; ACT-003 written agreement gate; spike is paid regardless of structure | Zaid | Open |
| RSK-003 | IP ownership ambiguity over code you contribute | You bring substantial engineering; Mario brings methodology and domain | 3 | 4 | HIGH | Written IP terms before Build stage; vesting if partnership; define walk-away rights | Zaid | Open |
| RSK-004 | Market unknown — established BIM/CAD vendors occupy adjacent space | No customer evidence yet; documents may describe a tool without a buyer | 3 | 3 | MEDIUM | Extract target user from docs (ACT-001); name 3 prospective users before Build | Zaid | Open |
| RSK-005 | Key-person dependency on Mario | His domain knowledge is both the moat and the single point of failure | 3 | 3 | MEDIUM | Codify his process mapping into the product from day one; document decisions | Zaid | Open |
| RSK-006 | Payment risk if Mario is bootstrapping | Partner-level commitment without funding means deferred or missed payments | 2 | 4 | MEDIUM | Milestone-based invoicing; spike payment up front; structure decision includes funding reality | Zaid | Open |