Skip to main content
OUTPUTS

Not a summary. A spec package.

RuleFoundry returns multiple views of the same extracted logic so product, domain, and engineering teams can review the same structure before build.

Flow diagrams

Decision trees and process maps that show the actual path the workflow follows.

Rules catalogs

Explicit conditions, thresholds, exception paths, and dependencies in one structured view.

Pseudo-code

Implementation-grade logic structure for engineering teams.

Scenario packs

Example cases that pressure-test the rules and expose missing branch coverage.

Acceptance criteria

Testable statements teams can use to confirm that the implementation behaves correctly.

Source trace

A direct path from extracted rule back to the statement or explanation it came from.

Open questions

Gaps, contradictions, and unresolved conditions surfaced before engineering starts.

Implementation brief

A downstream package that helps engineering start from explicit logic instead of ambiguous notes.

FLAGSHIP BUNDLE

Sample output bundle: non-standard pricing approval routing

The exact format can vary by workflow, but the point stays the same: make the logic explicit, reviewable, and traceable before build begins.

Rules catalog

ConditionRoute
Finance review flag = trueFinance review
Region = DE and discount > 20%Regional finance
Strategic account and ARR > $250kVP Sales
Discount > 10%Sales manager
OtherwiseAuto-approve

Source trace

Finance review flag overrides the normal path

'Then finance gets it first, regardless of amount.'

Germany has a different discount threshold

'In Germany, anything over twenty percent goes to regional finance.'

Strategic accounts above $250k need VP Sales

'Strategic accounts above two-fifty need VP Sales sign-off.'

Acceptance criteria

Requests with a finance review flag always route to finance first.
German requests above twenty percent discount route to regional finance.
Strategic accounts above $250k ARR route to VP Sales even if the standard manager threshold is lower.
Any missing renewal rule remains open until the expert confirms whether renewals follow the same path.

Open questions

Do renewals follow the same thresholds?
Do partner-led accounts need operations review?
Can regional finance delegate back to sales management?
IMPLEMENTATION VIEW

Pseudo-code gives engineering a starting structure

The goal is not polished production code. It is a precise, implementation-grade representation of the logic and the open questions around it.

function determineApprovalPath(requestAmount, customerType, region, existingFlags) -> ApprovalDecision

inputs:
- requestAmount
- customerType
- region
- existingFlags

logic:
- if existingFlags include "finance_review_required", route to finance
- else if region is "DE" and requestAmount > regionalThreshold, route to regional finance
- else if customerType is "strategic" and requestAmount > strategicApprovalThreshold, route to VP Sales
- else if requestAmount > standardApprovalThreshold, route to manager approval
- else approve automatically

open_questions:
- confirm whether renewals follow the same threshold rules
- confirm whether partner-led accounts require operations review
WHY THIS MATTERS

Better handoffs happen when the logic is explicit

The real value is not prettier documentation. It is fewer clarification loops, cleaner engineering starts, and a stronger foundation for implementation.

Use one workflow to see what a spec package feels like in practice

The best proof is still a real workflow, not a generic brochure claim.