Split background, approach, and results into sections
The source mixes industry, changes, impressions, and the stalled follow-up into one paragraph. Separate sections let readers judge substance themselves.
Raw material becomes a case study structure: background, approach, results, limits, and open items. No invented client names, industries, sizes, or percentage results; missing figures stay as placeholders and nothing unsuccessful is recast as a win.
We trace what happened, isolate every result figure, and list the missing numbers and client permissions you need before publishing.
SAMPLE OUTPUT
This is the complete output for the material in the demo above: a completeness score, itemised improvements, items to confirm before publishing, and the case study draft. It is a demonstration, not a customer case.
The source mixes industry, changes, impressions, and the stalled follow-up into one paragraph. Separate sections let readers judge substance themselves.
“Feels faster” has no corresponding measure. The impression survives, but the results section notes what checkable data is needed instead of converting it into a percentage.
The contact leaving and nothing further shipping is a material constraint. It goes into limits, with a note that this case does not represent long-term results.
# Case study draft **Background**: client operates in industrial consumables; quotation relied on spreadsheets with calculation rules spread across several files. [TODO: confirm whether the client name may be published] **Approach** - Mapped the existing calculation rules and moved them into the system for automated quoting - Left the client's own formula set untouched so existing results were preserved - [TODO: add go-live date and roles involved] **Results** - Used for roughly three months; users report the flow is smoother than before - [TODO: the source gives no quantified result; add a checkable metric or drop this section] **Limits** - Unmeasured impressions cannot support a performance claim - The client-side contact has left and rollout stalled, so this case does not represent long-term results **Pending**: obtain the client's written permission to publish this case.
WHAT DRAFTING DOES
Without the situation they faced, nothing later has a reference point and no one can gauge difficulty.
Blended together, what was done reads as what it delivered. Almost every case study has this confusion.
“Roughly doubled” and “saved plenty” are not sources. Note where a figure can be checked.
WHY WRITE IT THIS WAY
Vague background and the case carries no transferable information — persuasion without substance.
The results section needs a number, so one appears. The moment someone asks about it, credibility goes with it.
What was tried and did not work is usually the densest material. Delete it and the case study turns into an ad.
Note: how useful a case study is depends on how closely the reader resembles that client and on how the deployment was run and for how long; there is no general effect benchmark. This site structures and organises wording only. It does not verify figures, does not invent clients, and offers no investment, procurement, or performance advice.
DRAFTING DEMO
The client sells industrial consumables. We rebuilt their quotation process, mainly moving calculations out of spreadsheets and into the system. There was one set of formulas they wrote themselves that we did not dare touch, so it stayed. It has been running about three months; people say it feels faster, though I never measured how much. Their main contact recently left, so nothing further was rolled out.
# Case study draft **Background**: client operates in industrial consumables; quotation relied on spreadsheets with calculation rules spread across several files. [TODO: confirm whether the client name may be published] **Approach** - Mapped the existing calculation rules and moved them into the system for automated quoting - Left the client's own formula set untouched so existing results were preserved - [TODO: add go-live date and roles involved] **Results** - Used for roughly three months; users report the flow is smoother than before - [TODO: the source gives no quantified result; add a checkable metric or drop this section] **Limits** - Unmeasured impressions cannot support a performance claim - The client-side contact has left and rollout stalled, so this case does not represent long-term results **Pending**: obtain the client's written permission to publish this case.
Demo sample: background separated from results, unmeasured impressions marked as needing data, and the stalled rollout stated as a limit. Paste your material to get your version (sign-in required; one credit per run).
WHY YOU CAN TRUST IT
Names, industries, sizes, regions, and contacts are reproduced as supplied. Anything absent becomes a confirmation item rather than a plausible filler.
With no metric supplied, the draft says so and notes what would be needed. It never produces a convenient “about thirty percent better”.
Stalled rollouts, weak outcomes, or approaches that were rejected go into limits or open items exactly as described.
Submitted text is used for this single AI request and is not intentionally persisted. See the Privacy Policy.
FAQ
Yes. The results section states that the source provides none and notes what measures would be needed, rather than supplying numbers for you.
It is written as it happened. Stalled or partial outcomes go into limits or open items instead of being reframed as a success.
Yes. Without permission we describe in brackets what may be disclosed, and list written clearance as a confirmation item.
One credit per run, usually done in seconds, returning the draft, the reasoning, and items to confirm.
No. Credits never expire — whatever you do not use carries over to the next cycle instead of resetting.
Not yet. Each run processes one document and consumes one credit; there is no bulk upload or API today. Email us with your use case and we will assess it.
Not intentionally. Text is used for this single AI request only. See the Privacy Policy.
Debrief notes, interview transcripts, chat excerpts, delivery summaries, collected client feedback — any raw material describing one real engagement.
SIMPLE PRICING
For an occasional publishing cadence, with a focused monthly credit allocation.
For frequent publishers who iterate on content continuously.
Our largest monthly credit allocation, for the heaviest continuous usage.
Credits never expire: unused credits carry over instead of resetting. Credits apply to this site only and are not shared with other sites.
Prices shown are USD baselines; final currency, taxes, and discounts are determined by Paddle for the checkout location.