Titanium 1.4 · APRI™ Diligence

An analyst that knows the methodology.
Built for the deal file.

APRI™ — AI-Powered Risk Intelligence — is the diligence analyst built into the PE platform. It’s read Someone Else’s Debt: knows the five pillars, the CCOD aggregation, the valuation adjustment bands. Ask it about a target in plain English; it answers in seconds, with citations to live engagement data you can re-run yourself. Every conversation is logged on an independent audit chain. Every claim is sourced.

Request a walkthrough See sample questions

deal stages covered

~3 min

from prompt to cited answer

Minutes

not weeks of diligence

APRI™diligence-mode analyst

Hi, I’m APRI^™.

Ask me about any engagement in your book. I know the methodology and cite every claim.

Where does Project Phoenix land in the bands?

What's driving Pillar 3 on Project Phoenix?

Verify Apex Healthtech is current on attestation.

Where does Project Phoenix land in the bands?

Phoenix lands in the 5–10% band — Q90 at $14.3M against $220M EV (6.5%). Pillar 3 (Data Sensitivity & Regulatory Exposure) drives 60% of the figure.

get_engagementget_document_analysis

Ask APRI™ about an engagement

The shift

Diligence already showed you the number. APRI^™ tells you why.

For every engagement, every pillar, every finding — the platform surfaces what matters. Interpreting the result, drafting the narrative, framing the recommendation in deal-team vocabulary — that’s been your lion’s share. APRI™ takes it on. You make the calls. We do the math.

Live in every Diligence subscription

The dashboard shows you the number.
The analyst tells you why.

APRI™ · Capabilities

Knows the methodology. Cites the data. Speaks IC.

Three jobs. Every conversation. APRI™ is methodology-fluent because the QCD spec is loaded as its system instruction; it cites because every claim is backed by a tool call you can re-run yourself; and it speaks IC because the shapes it returns drop straight into your memo.

Knows the methodology, fluent in the bands. APRI™ doesn’t need briefing on QCD. Ask “where does Project Phoenix land?” and it returns the band, the dominant driver, and the next-best remediation — in one turn.

Cites what it sees. Every answer shows the tool calls behind it. APRI™ reads the same engagement data your dashboard does, at the moment you asked — click any citation to land on the underlying view.

Speaks IC, not SOC.Pillar drill-downs, band placements, scenario comparisons, driver analysis — APRI™ answers in the shapes that go straight into your IC memo, not security-report jargon.

A scene

The afternoon before IC.

What 4:00 PM Tuesday looks like with APRI™ in the panel.

4:00 PM · TUESDAY

Project Phoenix goes to IC tomorrow at 9. You need to walk the chair through the CCOD, the dominant driver behind Pillar 3, the band it lands in, and what would move the recommendation. The deck is half-built. Eight new documents hit the data room while you were on another call.

Before APRI™

You open the engagement page. Click into each pillar. Pull the document analysis. Cross-reference the findings list. Build talking points in a side doc. Re-read the band thresholds in case the chair asks. Hope you didn’t miss the one finding that comes up in Q&A.

With APRI™

“Walk me through Project Phoenix for IC tomorrow — CCOD, dominant driver, band, and what would move the recommendation.” APRI™ pulls the engagement, drills the pillars, places the band, and surfaces the sensitivity in one stream. Every claim cited. You drop it into the deck.

You read the deal, not the screen.

Workflows · Across the book

One analyst. Every deal stage.

Four canonical asks — pre-LOI triage, in-flight drill-down, pre-close decision support, post-close portfolio tracking.

Triage these three targets. Which has the highest residual exposure?

1Pull each engagement's CCOD and pillar contributions

2Compare scenario tails (Q90/Q99) side-by-side

3Surface the target with the highest residual exposure and the dominant pillar behind it

What's driving Pillar 3 on Project Phoenix?

1Pull the engagement's document analysis and QCD classification

2Identify materiality drivers behind Pillar 3 (Data Sensitivity & Regulatory Exposure)

3Show the documents and findings backing the score

Where does Project Phoenix land in the bands? What's the recommended escrow?

1Pull CCOD with Q90/Q99 against enterprise value

2Map to the valuation adjustment band (< 2% / 2–5% / 5–10% / 10–20% / > 20%)

3Report band, recommendation type, and Q90-minus-tolerance escrow size

Verify Apex Healthtech is current on attestation. Pull recent corrections.

1Run the quarterly compliance attestation check for the period

2List corrections logged since handoff

3Surface anything overdue against the engagement's handoff prerequisites

Coming next

Open a P1 finding on Project Phoenix's exposed S3 bucket.

1Draft the finding — severity, scope, suggested remediation

2Show a confirmation gate — your name, what fires, where it lands

3Open the finding under your identity, attributed in the audit trail

Coming next

Attest CTL-AUTH-MFA-001 in place for Project Phoenix's Q2.

1Pull current control state and the last attestation on record

2Draft an attestation matching the period and scope

3Confirmation gate, then attest under your identity

Trust by construction

Built so it can live in your deal file.

Most AI tools weren’t designed for a regulated record. APRI™ was. Here’s the architecture decision behind every conversation you have with it.

Privileged record

Every APRI conversation is treated as diligence work product — retained 7+ years by default, optional legal hold per session. The record your auditor expects you to keep, and your counsel expects to review.

An audit chain that stands alone

APRI runs on a separate binary, separate database, separate event topic, and a dedicated, hash-linked audit chain. A forensic auditor can verify its integrity without depending on any other vCISO Lite system. That's the legal-isolation thesis.

Scoped to what you can see

APRI runs on your entitlements, not a service account. Analyst, partner, and admin all get different visibility. If you can't see a record, neither can APRI when it's acting on your behalf.

You make the calls

APRI works at your request and runs under your identity. Every action it takes is a record you can stand behind — not one you have to explain.

For developers

APRI^™ Diligence is a public MCP, too. Wire it into your own stack.

If you’re already on APRI™ Diligence, you don’t need a second contract to use it from Cursor.

Same analyst, same 14 tools, same legal-isolation thesis — exposed as a Model Context Protocol server at mcp.vcisolite.com/mcp. Connect from Claude Desktop, claude.ai, Cursor, or any MCP-speaking client. Your existing Diligence sign-in authenticates the connection. Your assistant initializes with the QCD methodology loaded as the server-scoped instruction. The tools work against your book from wherever you connect.

$# For existing APRI™ Diligence subscribers — sign in on first connect
claude mcp add --transport http apri-diligence https://mcp.vcisolite.com/mcp

# Claude.ai — Settings → Connectors → Add custom → https://mcp.vcisolite.com
# Cursor    — Settings → MCP Servers → Add → https://mcp.vcisolite.com/mcp

How it fits

An analyst on top of the platform you already have.

APRI™ sits on top of the PE platform you already use. Same engagement data, same analysis pipeline, same audit trail — orchestrated.

YouPE analysts, partners, operating partnersPlain-English asks · No tab juggling

APRI™ Diligencediligence-apri-gateway · MCP server · 14 dd-room toolsRoutes, executes, composes, cites

The PE platformEngagements · CCOD analysis · Findings · Handoff · Deletion certificatesThe capability set APRI™ operates

Your dealsTarget documents · Vendor lists · Architecture diagrams · SOC reportsThe materials uploaded for the engagement

APRI^™ is included in every Diligence subscription.

Request a walkthrough Read the developer docs

Diligence already showed you the number. APRI™ tells you why.