# Multi-model system design sheet

From Dryvn AI, https://www.dryvn.ca/resources/how-multi-model-ai-systems-work

## How to use this sheet

One sheet per task. A multi-model system gives different roles to different models: one drafts, one checks against the source records, an optional challenger looks for what both missed, and a person decides. Fill in every row before you build anything. If you cannot write down the checker and the disagreement rule, you are not ready to add a second model; one model plus a human check is the better system. Keep the draft, the checker's list and the decision together so you can tell later whether the extra model earned its keep.

## Blank worksheet

| Field | Your answer |
| --- | --- |
| Task (one sentence) | |
| Owner of the outcome (a named person) | |
| Drafter role: what it is given | |
| Drafter role: what it produces | |
| Checker role: what it compares against (source records, not the drafter's reasoning) | |
| Checker role: the list it must produce | |
| Challenger role (optional): the one question it is asked | |
| Disagreement rule: fact mismatch | |
| Disagreement rule: judgement mismatch | |
| Disagreement rule: missing case | |
| Human decision: who, by when | |
| Evidence kept (draft, lists, decision) | |
| Review date | |

## Fictional example (illustrative only)

An invented small accounting firm producing month-end client summaries. It shows the shape of a system, not a measured result.

| Field | Answer |
| --- | --- |
| Task | Write each client's plain-language month-end summary. |
| Owner of the outcome | The partner responsible for that client. |
| Drafter: given | Ledger totals, last month's summary, firm rules (never comment on tax position; always name the source report). |
| Drafter: produces | A one-page summary in the firm's format. |
| Checker: compares against | The draft and the ledger totals only. |
| Checker: list | Every number or claim in the draft that does not match the ledger. |
| Challenger: question | What in this summary would embarrass the firm if the client forwarded it to their bank? |
| Fact mismatch | Draft goes back to the drafter once with the list attached; second failure goes to the partner. |
| Judgement mismatch | Partner rewrites that sentence personally. |
| Missing case | Partner decides whether it becomes a standing rule for the drafter, the checker, or a human-only step. |
| Human decision | The responsible partner, before the summary is sent, same day. |
| Evidence kept | Draft, checker list, challenger flags and the partner's decision stored with the client file. |
| Review date | Three months after go-live; count how many flags were real. |