Document Type: Specification
Status: Active Specification
Version: v1.0
Authority: Research Brain (Subordinate to MWMS HeadOffice)
Applies To: Offer-level opportunity research conducted within Research Brain
Parent: Research Brain Architecture
Linked Systems:
Affiliate Brain
Ads Brain
Finance Brain
Offer Intelligence
Opportunity Queue
MWMS Decision Authority Matrix
MWMS System Data Flow Map
Last Reviewed: 2026-03-26
Purpose
This specification defines the required structure, evidence handling, and workflow for researching a single offer or opportunity inside Research Brain.
The purpose of this task is to convert raw opportunity signals into structured intelligence that improves decision quality across the MWMS ecosystem.
This task produces:
• structured opportunity understanding
• evidence-linked observations
• research-supported evaluation framing
• routing clarity for downstream Brains
• traceable reasoning linked to observable evidence
Research Brain improves decision quality by improving information quality.
Research Brain does not execute decisions.
Scope
This specification applies to research tasks where the primary subject is an identifiable opportunity entity.
Examples include:
• affiliate offer
• product opportunity
• funnel opportunity
• landing page
• advertorial opportunity
• lead generation opportunity
• competitor offer
• niche opportunity signal
• opportunity referred by another Brain
This specification defines an Affiliate-first research structure but is designed for reuse across Research Brain.
This specification governs structured opportunity understanding.
This specification does not govern:
• capital allocation decisions
• ROI modelling
• campaign launch approval
• scaling approval
• budget sizing
• creative production decisions
• execution sequencing
Execution authority remains distributed across MWMS according to the Decision Authority Matrix.
System Position
This task operates within the early-stage intelligence layer of Research Brain.
Position within Research flow:
Intake
→ Classification
→ Opportunity Research (this task)
→ Routing decision support
→ downstream Brain processing
→ experiment or execution design
→ outcome logging
→ pattern detection
→ HeadOffice visibility
This task informs downstream Brains but does not replace them.
This task improves clarity prior to execution-layer decisions.
Core Principle
Research Brain converts information into structured intelligence.
Research Brain does not convert intelligence into execution authority.
Research Brain must:
• separate observation from interpretation
• identify evidence strength
• declare uncertainty clearly
• avoid overstating weak evidence
• preserve traceability of reasoning
• avoid narrative inflation
• maintain structural consistency
Research Brain must never:
• approve capital allocation
• approve scaling decisions
• approve campaign activation
• override Finance Brain authority
• present vendor claims as validated truth
• fabricate supporting evidence
• inflate confidence beyond evidence strength
Unit of Work
One task equals one opportunity research record.
Each task must analyse one identifiable opportunity entity.
Examples:
• one offer
• one funnel opportunity
• one landing page
• one competitor offer
• one opportunity signal cluster
Unrelated opportunities must not be merged into one task.
Where multiple pages relate to the same opportunity, they may be included within a single research record.
Required Inputs
Each research task must include sufficient observable material to support structured evaluation.
Minimum required input:
• Offer URL or primary source link
• Offer title or descriptive identifier
• Source origin
• Requesting Brain
• Initial category classification
Optional supporting inputs:
• additional funnel-step URLs
• screenshots
• ad library references
• competitor pages
• network listing pages
• pricing pages
• checkout flow observations
• vendor documentation
• notes supplied by M
If observable material is insufficient, the task must explicitly declare insufficient evidence.
Allowed Research Tools
Research Brain may use:
• direct page inspection
• observable funnel-step inspection
• publicly visible pricing information
• publicly visible positioning language
• observable structural patterns
• competitor comparison where visible
• screenshots supplied as evidence
• structured reasoning
• cross-reference to known funnel structures
• cross-reference to known offer patterns
Research Brain must not assume:
• hidden funnel mechanics
• conversion performance
• margin structure
• backend economics
• traffic source viability
• compliance approval status
• advertiser approval status
Where information is unknown, uncertainty must be declared explicitly.
Evidence Framework
Each research task must consider evidence strength.
Evidence must be interpreted using Research Brain evidence-tier logic.
Evidence Source Tier
Tier 1
Internal testing results
Observed performance data
Tier 2
Observed market behaviour
Competitor analysis
observable funnel structures
Tier 3
expert commentary
educational material
industry interpretation
Tier 4
vendor claims
promotional claims
unverified assertions
social discussion
Tier 4 evidence cannot become validated truth through repetition alone.
Confidence must reflect:
Evidence Density
and
Evidence Source Tier
Required Metadata Fields
Each research record must include structured metadata fields:
Insight_ID
Insight_Type
Domain_Tag
Theme_Tag
Evidence_Source(s)
Evidence_Type
Evidence_Source_Tier
Evidence_Density
Confidence_Level
Date_Logged
Requesting Brain
Suggested Destination Brain
These fields enable traceability across Research Brain and downstream systems.
Insight Type Classification
Each task must declare Insight_Type:
Tactical Insight
Structural Model
Strategic Principle
Most offer research tasks will be classified as Tactical Insight.
Classification must reflect the level of abstraction present in the research.
Mandatory Analysis Sections
Each research task must produce structured analysis for the following sections.
Product / Offer Overview
Describe what is being offered.
Include observable information:
• product type
• delivery format
• core promise
• visible target user
• visible pricing structure where observable
This section describes the opportunity without evaluation.
Offer Model
Identify the commercial structure where observable.
Examples:
• one-time purchase
• subscription
• CPA
• lead generation
• free plus upsell
• multi-step monetisation
• hybrid structure
If unknown, state unknown.
Funnel / Page Type
Describe the observable funnel structure.
Examples:
• advertorial
• VSL
• quiz funnel
• long-form sales page
• opt-in page
• product detail page
• webinar funnel
• multi-step funnel
Describe observable structure only.
Do not assume hidden steps.
Market / Niche Read
Describe the observable market context.
Consider:
• target audience
• problem framing
• emotional drivers
• niche maturity signals
• sophistication indicators
• positioning signals
Separate observation from interpretation.
Competitor / Angle Observations
Describe observable positioning structure.
Consider:
• headline framing
• mechanism claims
• angle structure
• differentiation signals
• pattern similarity to known offers
• novelty indicators
Avoid unsupported claims of uniqueness.
Compliance / Platform Risk
Identify observable risk indicators.
Examples:
• exaggerated health claims
• exaggerated income claims
• before-after implications
• unrealistic guarantees
• sensitive attribute targeting
• platform-sensitive language
Flag observable risk signals clearly.
Do not declare compliance approval.
Strengths
Identify observable strengths supported by evidence.
Examples:
• clarity of promise
• coherence of funnel structure
• credible positioning
• structural consistency
• visible proof elements
• clarity of targeting
Strength statements must link to evidence.
Weaknesses / Concerns
Identify observable uncertainty factors.
Examples:
• weak differentiation
• crowded positioning
• unclear targeting
• fragile claims
• structural inconsistency
• unclear funnel logic
Distinguish between:
unknown
uncertain
negative
Research Verdict Support
Provide structured reasoning explaining the opportunity evaluation.
Explain:
• why the opportunity may deserve further attention
• why the opportunity may require caution
• what evidence supports the reasoning
• what information is missing
• what uncertainty remains
Verdict reasoning must link to evidence.
Recommended Next Step
Provide suggested handling direction.
Allowed outputs:
Route to Affiliate Brain
Route to Ads Brain
Park
Reject for now
Monitor only
Escalate compliance concern
Prepare for Finance review
Gather more evidence
This field is advisory only.
Allowed Verdict Classes
Promising
Needs More Validation
Weak or Crowded
High Risk
Insufficient Evidence
Verdict must align with evidence strength.
Confidence must not exceed evidence quality.
Relationship to Finance Brain
Research Brain evaluates:
opportunity structure
market context
funnel structure
risk indicators
Finance Brain evaluates:
economic viability
expected return
capital exposure
risk tolerance
scaling constraints
Research Brain informs Finance Brain.
Research Brain does not replace Finance Brain.
Non Functions
This task must not:
allocate capital
forecast ROI
approve scaling
approve campaign launch
approve creative production
define budget levels
replace Finance Brain authority
replace Affiliate Brain authority
This task must not become an execution tool.
Implementation Guidance
The structured research template UI should reflect these sections.
Each section may be modularised into separate files.
Initial implementation may store structured output within existing fields until schema expansion is approved.
Schema expansion is not required for initial deployment.
Drift Protection
This task must not drift into:
informal note-taking
copywriting production
execution planning
financial modelling
creative production
strategic authority
Research must remain:
evidence-linked
structurally consistent
traceable
bounded by scope
Confidence must remain proportional to evidence strength.
Architectural Intent
This specification establishes a reusable research task structure that can operate across multiple MWMS opportunity domains.
The Affiliate-first implementation provides a stable base pattern for future Research Brain task types.
Future task specifications may extend this structure without violating Research Brain authority boundaries.
The objective is consistent intelligence structure across the ecosystem.
Final Rule
Research Brain improves decision quality by improving information quality.
Research Brain does not become the decision authority.
Execution authority remains distributed across MWMS according to established governance structures.
Structured intelligence must remain separate from execution authority.