Skip to content
Holding·last review10 Jun 2026

An SMB AI vendor evaluation defensible to the typical cyber-insurance reasonable-care expectation can be completed in 90 minutes by walking through five questions in order — model provenance, data residency, sub-processor list, breach history, termination clause — each answered from the vendor's public site or the contract about to be signed.

Re-review 10 Jun 2026: the five public artefact surfaces the framework maps to remain live and in the asserted shape — Anthropic Trust Center up; OpenAI enterprise-privacy page live (bot-blocks scripted fetches at 403 but indexed and current); GDPR Article 28 text stable; ISO/IEC 42001 listing unchanged. No structural change to the trust-artefact landscape that would break the 90-minute walk-through. Claim holds unchanged. Editorial framework piece. Each question maps to a specific public artefact (Trust Center, DPA, sub-processor list, security/incident page, termination clause) such that absence of the artefact is itself the answer. Not a substitute for ISO 27001 or SOC 2; not a guarantee. Pairs with OPS-011 (use-case filter) — vendor selection happens after the use case clears OPS-011's filter.

Published
26 Apr 2026
Last reviewed
10 Jun 2026
Next review
+43d· 25 Jul 2026
Cohort
5-50p SMB about to sign with AI vendor
Cadence
60-day
Sample
editorial framework citing GDPR Art. 28, ISO/IEC 42001, Anthropic + OpenAI Trust Centers
Sibling claim
OPS-011Picking your first AI agent: the 4-question filter for SMBs
Embed this claimiframe + oEmbed
HTML iframe
Paste-the-URL (Substack, Medium, Notion, WordPress)

The card auto-updates when the claim's status, last-reviewed date, or correction log changes. Embedders never need to refresh — the card is rendered live from the canonical record.

Watch this claim

Email-me when OPS-014's status, next review date, or correction log changes. One email per change. No newsletter subscription, no other mail.

The claim: An SMB AI vendor evaluation defensible to the typical cyber-insurance reasonable-care expectation can be completed in 90 minutes by walking through five questions in order — model provenance, data residency, sub-processor list, breach history, termination clause — each answered from the vendor's public site or the contract about to be signed.

About this register

The Operators register tracks claims published from practitioner-advisory pieces addressed to solo founders, micro-SMB, and small businesses up to around fifty people. Claims are reviewed on a 30–45 day cadence — tooling and SMB-relevant pricing shift faster than enterprise procurement signals.

Recent corrections in Operators

  • OPS-051 · Partial · 10 Jun 2026

    One named member of the generation cluster was already defunct at publication: Tome shut down its presentation/narrative product (Tome Slides) in March 2025 and pivoted to sales tooling, with the brand later sold to AngelList (deckary.com shutdown timeline; signalhub.substack.com post-mortem, both checked 10 Jun 2026). The generation cluster reduces to Pitch + Gamma. The two-cluster thesis itself is unaffected and arguably strengthened — the pure AI-narrative product failed to find a sustainable business while Gamma (70M users, $100M ARR as of Nov 2025) and the assembly cluster (PandaDoc, Better Proposals, Proposify per Luniq 2026 agency comparison) both compound. Status Up → Partial for the factual error in the tool list.

  • OPS-022 · Partial · 10 Jun 2026

    Vendor attribution error in the claim text. The claim names Polley Faith among 'Spellbook with named small-firm customers Westaway, KMSC Law, Polley Faith'. Polley Faith LLP is a Harvey-listed law-firm customer, not a Spellbook customer: the live Spellbook site (now spellbook.com; spellbook.legal 301-redirects) names Westaway, KMSC Law, and McInnes Cooper with no Polley Faith, and the source article's own body correctly places Polley Faith on Harvey's roster — the claim text and the article excerpt bundled it with the wrong vendor at publish. The remaining legs verify against extracted source text on 10 Jun 2026: Anthropic's GC AI customer story carries 'More than 1,500 companies' and '14 hours saved per week on average ... based on a survey of more than 100 active customers' verbatim; Harvey's published roster (Thompson Hine, Fox Rothschild, Lowenstein Sandler, Polley Faith) matches; ABA Formal Opinion 512 remains the governance baseline. The corpus reading (AI ships at 1-to-20 lawyer scale; privileged work stays on Enterprise-tier zero-retention access) is unaffected. Status Up -> Partial.

  • OPS-071 · Partial · 10 Jun 2026

    Trigger condition (2) fired: the effective date moved. Governor Polis signed SB 26-189 on 14 May 2026 (Holland & Knight client alert, May 2026; Seyfarth; Littler). The signed law repeals and reenacts the original Colorado AI Act and its obligations take effect 1 Jan 2027 — not 30 Jun 2026 as the claim asserted. No operator obligation starts 30 Jun 2026; the only pre-2027 item is Colorado AG rulemaking due by 1 Jan 2027. The claim's structural reading holds (risk-management programmes and impact assessments dropped for a notice-and-transparency framework; consequential-decision scope covering employment, housing, credit, insurance, education, healthcare; no small-firm exemption). The urgency leg ('obligations from 30 June 2026') is overtaken. Status Up → Partial.

Reviews coming up in Operators

  • OPS-030 · Holding · next +15d (27 Jun 2026)

    The fastest path for an owner-operator to build practical agentic-AI competence in 2026 is the three-week build-by-ship…

  • OPS-029 · Holding · next +15d (27 Jun 2026)

    For solo founders and small teams (under ~50 people) building with AI in 2026, the build-vs-buy decision tree has inver…

  • OPS-005 · Holding · next +15d (27 Jun 2026)

    At sub-1M tokens per month (typical SMB agent volume) in 2026, the absolute dollar gap between Claude Haiku 4.5, GPT-4o…