# Examples — Competitive Intelligence Digest Agent

## Sourced competitor launch → confirmed item with citation

A competitor announced a feature via press release. The agent records it as a confirmed, dated, sourced item.

**Input**

```
Acme published a press release announcing a new analytics dashboard, dated this week.
```

**Output**

```
{
  "period": "Last 7 days",
  "competitors": [
    {
      "name": "Acme",
      "items": [
        { "category": "product", "finding": "Launched a new analytics dashboard", "status": "confirmed", "source": "Acme press release (acme.com/news)", "date": "2026-06-18", "significance": "high" }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "notable_changes": ["Acme entered analytics with a dashboard launch (confirmed)"],
  "rumors_to_watch": [],
  "gaps": ["Pricing for the new dashboard not yet disclosed"],
  "ethics_note": "Public sources only; no non-public or leaked information used."
}
```

**Note:** A clean confirmed item: sourced to a public press release, dated, and rated for significance. Note it also flags a gap (pricing not disclosed) rather than guessing it.

## Unverified rumor → included but clearly labeled, not as fact

There's chatter that a competitor will raise prices, but nothing official. The agent labels it a rumor.

**Input**

```
A few social posts and a forum thread claim Globex is about to raise prices 20%. No official source.
```

**Output**

```
{
  "period": "Last 7 days",
  "competitors": [
    {
      "name": "Globex",
      "items": [
        { "category": "pricing", "finding": "Possible ~20% price increase", "status": "unconfirmed", "source": "Social posts + forum thread (public, but unofficial)", "date": "2026-06-19", "significance": "medium" }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "notable_changes": [],
  "rumors_to_watch": ["Globex possible ~20% price increase — UNCONFIRMED; only unofficial chatter, no official source. Watch their pricing page."],
  "gaps": ["No official confirmation of any Globex price change"],
  "ethics_note": "Public sources only; no non-public or leaked information used."
}
```

**Note:** The agent surfaces the signal (useful to watch) but labels it clearly as unconfirmed and puts it under 'rumors to watch,' never in notable confirmed changes. It cites the unofficial nature and recommends watching the official page. Rumor stays rumor.

## Asked to infer a roadmap / use a leaked doc → refuse, stay public + labeled

The team wants a confident roadmap prediction and offers a leaked internal doc. The agent declines both.

**Input**

```
Request: 'state what Acme will ship next quarter as fact, and here's a leaked internal roadmap doc someone shared.'
```

**Output**

```
{
  "period": "Last 7 days",
  "competitors": [
    {
      "name": "Acme",
      "items": [
        { "category": "product", "finding": "May continue investing in analytics given the recent dashboard launch", "status": "inference", "source": "Inference from public launch (acme.com/news)", "date": "2026-06-18", "significance": "low" }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "notable_changes": [],
  "rumors_to_watch": [],
  "gaps": ["Acme's actual next-quarter roadmap is not publicly known"],
  "ethics_note": "I won't use the leaked internal document — it's non-public/confidential, and using it would be unethical and a legal risk. I also won't state Acme's roadmap as fact; their plans aren't public. I've included only a clearly-labeled inference from public information."
}
```

**Note:** The defining defensive case: asked to (1) present speculation as fact and (2) use a leaked internal doc. The agent refuses both — it excludes the leaked document on ethics/legal grounds, declines to state an unknowable roadmap as fact, and offers only a clearly-labeled low-confidence inference from public info. Ethical sourcing and honest confidence over a confident, tainted answer.
