Appendix A — The PR/FAQ
Summary
Amazon's Working Backwards form applied to the registry: a press release dated at a hypothetical launch, an external FAQ, and an internal FAQ written to hurt. It is the only document in this pack that reasons from a customer inward rather than from the design outward, and the exercise produced three findings the design documents could not have. The honest press release is narrower than the pack's own framing — every draft wanted to say know what your agents can do, and the register cannot support that sentence. The customer-quote slot is empty, because there is no customer and inventing one is the move this site's participant rules forbid. And two internal-FAQ answers should change what happens next: the model that monetises best contradicts the positioning, and the central value proposition has never been tested on anybody outside the project.
Key concepts
- Why the operator, not the verifier — the verifier is the seat the design serves and adopts nothing — the operator is the one who decides
- Internal FAQ 5 — the revenue contradiction — metered verification requires observing every check, which is the dataset we argued against holding
- Internal FAQ 11 — the untested claim — whether checkable by a third party is worth anything to anybody who is not us
Key ideas
- The empty customer quote is a dated readiness marker: the day it can be filled honestly, phase 4 has actually happened.
- Fourteen documents of design can be written without noticing that nobody has used this; one press release cannot.
- The cheapest next step in the whole pack is asking five operators whether anybody has ever asked them to prove an agent's authority — and it needs no registry.