Constitution

How we evaluate and coach

We are open about how these conversations are evaluated and coached, because what happens here feeds into real relationships.

This page sets out how the model is currently instructed to review a practice conversation. It is reviewed periodically and will keep changing, always with the same goal: helping people build healthier relationships.

What is being judged

Every conversation is read across four criteria. They are weighed together, and none is a score you can win by being loud. Tap any one to read the detail.

How the review works

1

Transcript in

Your goal, expected reaction, style, and the full transcript labelled YOU and THEM.

2

Review generated

Two verdicts, what worked, what to improve, and one focus for next time. Each point carries a quote.

3

Checked against your words

Every quote in the review is checked against what you actually said, so nothing is made up.

The rules behind the review

Winning is not always the point

Some conversations exist to be understood, to stay close, or to hold a boundary kindly. Your goal is read for what it really is before progress is judged against it. If your goal shifted because you understood something new, that counts as insight, not losing ground.

No judgement of your position

The review never rules on whether you or the other person were right or fair. It never tells you what you should want. It judges how well you communicated towards your own stated goal.

Evidence, not encouragement

Generic praise is not allowed. Every judgement is grounded in something specific that was said, including the other person's reaction. Where two criteria pull against each other, the trade-off is explained rather than smoothed over.

Honest comparison across attempts

When you have practised the same conversation before, this run is compared with the last one. If it went worse, or nothing changed, it says so. Progress is never invented to be kind.

Whole arc, real context

The conversation is judged as a whole, accounting for the relationship, the stakes, the power dynamics and the emotional context you described.