| RQ-001 | 2026-08-20 | Please read the project files and help me develop the project based on the attached governance, I need your help to develop the business enabling study to start a new NDIS business, so please once you setup the project based on the governance, proceed in creating a plan and excuting it to present me with all that I need to understand and make a decision about starting the business | Two requests in one. (a) Stand the project up under AI Project Governance Standard v3.7 — folder skeleton, registers, framing, bounded authority, dashboard, Help Hub, transfer pack, checkers. (b) Produce a business enabling study for a new NDIS business sufficient for a go/no-go capital decision. I read the request as decision-support, not as authorisation to start, register or transact anything. Ambiguity in the request: 'develop the project' could mean start the business; I acted on the narrower reading and recorded it here so the gap is visible. | Project stood up at class STANDARD; study, financial model and decision pack delivered to 05_Outputs. | Closed | 100 |
| RQ-002 | 2026-08-20 | [Intake answers, given through the clarification tool] Class: STANDARD. Jurisdiction: VIC. Services: Core supports - personal care & community participation, Support coordination / plan management, SIL / SDA - supported accommodation, Compare and recommend - I don't know yet. Decision: Both, in that order | Project class recorded as STANDARD under GOV-A1.8. Jurisdiction fixed to Victoria (REQ-CON-02). All three service models scoped and compared in a weighted trade study with a recommendation (REQ-SYS-04). Study sequenced go/no-go first, conditional roadmap second (REQ-SYS-08, REQ-SYS-09). | All four answers converted to constraints and requirements in the register. | Closed | 100 |
| RQ-003 | 2026-08-20 | Mate all the files should be saved on the computer | A correction, not a request. Deliverables had been produced in the session workspace and shown in the conversation, but the project folder on Zaid's own computer was not the place they lived. Read as a standing instruction for the rest of the project: the computer is the system of record, the conversation is a view of it. It also exposed DEF-020 — the Governance Standard itself, CI-001, had never been filed into the project. | Every artefact is written to the project folder on Zaid's computer and verified there before the work is called done. | Open | 70 |
| RQ-004 | 2026-09-07 | I want you to add the aged care business plan as well and do the necessary and provide me with an executive summary at the end | Three things. (a) Extend the project to cover an aged care business alongside the NDIS one. (b) 'Do the necessary' — Zaid's own words for the full governed treatment: research, verification, registers, models, checks, not a narrative appended to the existing study. (c) An executive summary at the end, which the intake answers scoped to Zaid alone, blunt and numbers-forward. Read as a Class 1 change under GOV-D2 because it alters the project's scope boundary, which is why it produced CR-007 rather than an edit. | Aged care modelled to the same standard as NDIS, both businesses covered by one governed baseline, and an executive summary written for Zaid. | Open | 60 |
| RQ-005 | 2026-09-07 | Intake answers: all four aged care segments (home care, residential, CHSP, and compare-and-recommend); two separate entities; extend this project to cover both; executive summary for Zaid alone. | The structural choice is the consequential one. Two separate entities was chosen for liability separation; it costs $606.50 a month, $7,278 a year and $22,578 over three years against a single entity. The choice is Zaid's to make and is recorded as DEC-006 with the price attached, not argued against. | The scope, the structure and the deliverable framing are all fixed and recorded. | Closed | 100 |
| RQ-006 | 2026-09-07 | use this to govern the project creation (with AI Project Governance Standard v3.9 text projection and v4.0 Business Layer Addition) | A change of governing standard mid-project, from v3.7 to v3.9 plus the v4.0 Business Layer. Class 1 under GOV-D2 because it changes the rules the project is judged against. Brings in the system breakdown, the file placement map, the source manifest, owner and review headers, proven-fix defect closure, the response-format rules, and the whole PIL-BZ business layer with its mandatory business_plan.json twin. | The project is rebuilt to satisfy v3.9 and v4.0, and the checker suite proves it rather than the project asserting it. | Open | 55 |