A team's quarter of documentation, compressed into a working week.
Tuttify Carbon doesn't just write faster. It restructures how a team collaborates on documentation — eight intake answers replace a kick-off meeting, five named gates replace ad-hoc review threads, and the hash-chained log replaces the changelog nobody updates.
The grind isn't writing. It's coordinating.
Most of a documentation cycle is consumed by handoffs, template debates, version drift, and re-asking the same context-questions in three different threads. Carbon eats the coordination cost — the part the spec doesn't bill for.
Reference Across 25 customer-trial and pilot projects to date. Exact compression scales with framework mix, project shape, and how deep the reviewer wants to go at each gate.
Five named gates. Not five-thousand Slack threads.
Each gate is a structured review the human approves, edits, or rejects. Visibility is configurable per project — a thorough Intervention Budget shows all five. Lighter budgets surface only the gates that matter for that project shape.
Four agents for a landing page. Eight for HITRUST. Carbon picks.
A marketing site doesn't need a STRIDE author. A HITRUST run can't go without one. Carbon's recipe resolver picks exactly which agents run for your project shape — and it's deterministic, not heuristic.
You don't pay for agents you don't need. And you can't accidentally ship a regulated bundle missing the agent that produces the artifact the regulator requires.
Plus AI-governance and rewrite agents if AI-touching surfaces are flagged at intake.
LLMs do the prose. Rules do the judgement.
The parts that have to be repeatable — quality scoring, requirement parsing, template assembly, traceability building, INCOSE checking — are rule-based. Language-model calls are isolated to the authoring agents and to a low-cost verifier. The boundary is documented in source.
Every artifact is written atomically. A tamper-evident hash-chained log is appended after every state-changing event. carbon audit verify greens the chain; tamper-demo reds it. Reviewers see the seal.
Authors see drafts. Reviewers see gates. Auditors see the chain.
The Command Center dashboard surfaces what each role needs to act. Authors see what's awaiting refinement. Reviewers see what's queued at a gate. Auditors see the hash chain, the provenance, and the diff history.
The Smart Intake wizard captures everything in eight questions. Voice input where it fits. Rewind back to any gate to amend a decision — every project carries a rewind count for transparency.
Each gate is a structured review surface. Edit any captured constraint in place. Reject and send back with a reason. The audit log records who approved what, when, and why.
One command verifies the hash chain. Every requirement links to its source. Every artifact diff is preserved. The seal either holds or it doesn't.
The bundle goes where the work lives.
A documentation engine that lives in a silo isn't a documentation engine — it's another tab. Tuttify Carbon ships requirements straight into Jira, and the rest of the bundle through a REST API your team can wire wherever it needs to land.
EARS-scored requirements sync into Jira issues with the provenance link preserved. Refinements at G4 flow back as comment-trail updates the reviewer can read.
Every artifact, every gate event, every hash-chain entry — surfaced through a documented REST API. Wire Carbon into Confluence, GitHub, Notion, or whatever your auditor reads.
Bundle exports are reviewer-shaped: Markdown for engineering, PDF for submission packages, CSV for the traceability matrix and the risk register.
Whatever tool the bundle lands in, the hash-chained history travels with it. carbon audit verify still greens (or reds) the chain post-export.
Bring us a project. We'll bring back days, not quarters.
Pick a build you've started, paused, or dreaded. We'll run it through Carbon with you in the room — and you'll see the bundle assemble, gate by gate, in the time it takes to brief us on the scope.