Analyst
Uses the approved method
ProductsUse case · Company reporting systems
Your next report should start from everything the last one learned.
Give every authorized analyst, teammate, and agent the same data sources, metric definitions, narrative style, prior reports, corrections, and review rules.
Start free. Generate one review-ready report from a shared method.
The reporting systemData, definitions, style, history
Shared in HQShared reporting skill
Agent
Produces the next draft
Leader
Reviews consistent evidence
The report is generated from a maintained company system, not reconstructed from a blank prompt.
Consistent metrics and narrative
Prior reports and corrections stay in the workflow
Review-ready drafts anyone authorized can produce
The broken workflow
The report is recurring. The reporting system is not.
Every cycle begins with collecting data, explaining the metric logic, finding last week's format, and remembering which corrections the stakeholder made.
The method lives with the analyst
The person who knows the source quirks, calculations, and narrative bar becomes the only reliable operator.
History is hard to reuse
Prior reports exist, but the decisions and corrections behind them are buried across comments and chats.
Automation stops at extraction
Data can be pulled automatically while interpretation, storytelling, and review still restart every cycle.
The HQ workflow
Automate from the full reporting context.
HQ keeps the connection, metric definitions, analysis method, prior output, narrative style, and review loop together for every run.
- 01Analyst
Ground the reporting system
Connect the approved source and record metric definitions, known caveats, and the stakeholder's real decision needs.
- 02Report owner
Package the analysis and style
Add the prior report, narrative structure, reference examples, checks, and delivery format to a shared skill.
- 03Team and agent
Generate, review, and retain the learning
Produce the next draft, have a teammate review it, and save corrections for the following run.
Why HQ
AI can analyze a file. HQ preserves the reporting system around it.
Use the model that fits the work while HQ carries the company-owned inputs and quality standard from one reporting cycle to the next.
The layerOne-off AI analysisWith HQ
InputsA file or query attached for this runApproved data, definitions, and source rules
NarrativeWhatever one operator requestsShared structure, examples, and stakeholder standard
ContinuityThe result ends with the conversationPrior reports and corrections improve the next run
What the team can inspect
The proof is a report someone else can reproduce and review.
A useful system connects the same trusted inputs to the same interpretation and output standard, even when a different teammate starts the work.
Metric contract
Sources, calculations, date logic, and caveats are explicit and reusable.
Narrative standard
Prior reports, examples, structure, tone, and review checks travel with the workflow.
Review history
Stakeholder corrections become inputs to the next report instead of a private memory.
What changes
Reporting gets faster without forgetting how quality is produced.
- 01
Reduce analyst setup and rework
- 02
Keep metrics and narrative consistent
- 03
Let each report improve the next cycle
Your first win
Reproduce one trusted report from shared context.
Start with a report the business already values, then prove that the next draft can be produced and reviewed from the company-owned method.
Build your first reporting workflow- 1
Add one approved data source and one strong prior report
- 2
Capture metric definitions, narrative structure, and review checks
- 3
Generate the next draft and have a second teammate review it
Built for company work
Automation should make evidence easier to inspect.
HQ keeps sources, definitions, methods, outputs, and review ownership visible so automated drafts remain accountable to the team.
- Known source and metric definitions
- Human review for material decisions
- Corrections retained with the company workflow
HQ helps teams reproduce their reporting method. It does not guarantee that an external source is complete or that every generated interpretation is correct.
Start with one workflow
Make the next report the first run of a better system.
Start with one source, one trusted example, and one teammate reviewing a draft that already knows how your company reports.