AG.it is a control plane where a project's state isn't reported — it's computed. Every number on the screen is a promise of trust, so this page is honest about it: what gets computed, what makes a number true, and where a number rests on a human decision rather than a bare fact.
Status, money and risk aren't what someone wrote about themselves. They are derived from three kinds of facts and recomputed from scratch on every change.
Any number opens up to its cause: the verdict shows an evidence line (“N tasks closed · M/K goals accepted”), and every change in the diff stands on the date of a fact or a signal. If data is missing, it says so in words — it never substitutes a plausible zero.
The key indicators a buyer cares about. For each: what it means, and what makes it true. Money is always kept separate by currency — rubles and dollars are never merged into one total.
The sum over milestones that are already accepted. This is money whose outcome is locked in.
True when: the milestone is accepted — the act is signed (or acceptance is explicitly confirmed by a person). Until the act exists, money doesn't land here, no matter how many tasks are closed.
The sum over money milestones not yet accepted. Money in flight: the outcome may be nearly done, but the act isn't signed.
True when: a milestone has money and a deadline but no acceptance yet. “Revenue + backlog” = the project's entire money figure.
The part of “backlog” flagged red: money that may not arrive. It's a subset of backlog, not a separate sum on top.
True when: an unaccepted money milestone is blocked, marked at-risk, or its deadline has already passed. A passed deadline counts as a threat even if the work is on track — deliberately cautious, in favour of early warning.
How many days the project is behind plan. Highlighted in the header and the verdict line.
True when: computed from task dates — it's the largest delay across tasks (the most overdue one sets the bar), not an average. A direct read from planned dates, no manual estimate.
The share of closed tasks. Useful as a pace of work, but on its own it isn't money — which is why the money read, not the percentage, always leads.
True when: computed as the percentage of closed tasks out of active ones (cancelled tasks are excluded from the denominator). It's about activity; “80% done” says nothing without a money read beside it.
The project's traffic light: on track · risk · danger. The same criterion for the project card and the portfolio register.
True when: derived from facts — a blocked goal or a large delay → danger; an at-risk goal, a meaningful delay, or a new risk → risk; otherwise on track. A green chip can't sit above a “money at risk” banner — the worse of the two is taken.
A one-line diagnosis: what matters now (“Money at risk — outcome not locked in”). Beneath it, an evidence line built from facts.
True when: chosen by a strict rule priority — instrument failure and blockers first, then delay, unclosed money, new risks. The evidence (“N tasks closed · M/K goals accepted”) keeps the verdict on facts, not on phrasing.
The difference between two snapshots: what's achieved, what slipped, which signals arrived. Every change with an actual date.
True when: two plan snapshots and the signal stream between them are reconciled. Separately: where a human “done” is confirmed by the authoritative snapshot, and where it's contradicted.
An “N findings” chip in the header: a goal without an acceptance criterion, a milestone without an amount, a dangling dependency, accumulated deadline shifts. Not work status — the quality of the model itself.
True when: the linter has run over the plan structure and the goal graph from a single source. Findings are conservative — better to stay silent than raise a false alarm.
When the latest snapshot was taken. A project is flagged “stale” if the snapshot is over a week old — so you know which moment you're looking at.
True when: the whole plane is computed from one time axis. You can rewind to any date (time-travel) — state is rebuilt from snapshots as it was then, reproducibly.
Where a number rests on something other than a clean external fact, we say so plainly. This is a matter of integrity, not a defect: trust in a number should be graduated.
A few rules we hold firmly — these are what separate a control plane from a pretty dashboard.
Want to see this live — the owner scenario walks the same screens step by step, on live demo data.