Dos and Don’ts

This is the most critical page in the playbook. Violating these rules can create compliance risk, misrepresent SPOT’s capabilities, or damage institutional trust. Every team member must internalize these before pitching.

DO

DO describe SPOT as an “AI-powered KYB diagnostic and intelligence platform”
DO emphasize that calculations are deterministic, hard-coded, and validated via strict schemas
DO highlight source-only data integrity and confidence scoring
DO mention Malaysian-context specificity (SSM, CTOS, CCRIS, CIDB, MOF)
DO reference RMiT alignment when speaking to financial institutions
DO lead with the “economic invisibility” problem when setting context
DO use the full SPOT name on first mention: “SPOT (Single Point of Truth)”
DO emphasize speed: “structured profiles in 6 to 8 minutes”
DO mention data residency (AWS Malaysia ap-southeast-5) when trust questions arise
DO position SPOT as an enabler of financial inclusion

DO NOT

DO NOT frame SPOT as an automated loan-approval system or credit decision maker
DO NOT refer to the AI as a generator of random financial metrics; it is an analytical text commentator and document synthesizer
DO NOT promise that SPOT will guarantee loan approval or financing
DO NOT use alternative names like “Odela Paperwork Scanner,” “Spot Document Engine,” or “Document Scanner”
DO NOT use lowercase “spot” — always uppercase SPOT
DO NOT describe SPOT as “just another AI tool” — emphasize the deterministic difference
DO NOT skip the “this is a diagnostic tool, not a decision maker” disclaimer when speaking to banks
DO NOT compare SPOT directly to competitors in negative terms; focus on differentiation
DO NOT make claims about SPOT’s capabilities that are not in the approved documentation
DO NOT discuss SPOT’s internal AI architecture in detail with external audiences