Show Which Rule Mattered

Show the decisive rule or jointly required conditions, and distinguish checked from skipped steps.

See the situation

Start with the situation below. Next, we will work through an example together before you try the activity.

Maya · Decision designer

The case

Complete evidence, unreadable result

A rule trace should show what was evaluated and what was skipped. A counterfactual tests which change would alter the result.

Outcome: Not a prospect
Inputs displayed: 11, with values and sources
Inputs that look positive: 9
Rule that decided: The second one evaluated
Time spent reconstructing: 40 minutes, by two people

Your task

Reveal the rule trace. Change the revenue and website inputs to see which one changes the decision.

Need a little guidance?

You’re done when: You can point to the rule or jointly required conditions that changed the path.

A trace is more useful than a generic “because the score was low.”

Need a reminder? Reopen the worked example

Watch one example first

Eligibility requires revenue above $5M AND a verified project. An $8M company with no project does not pass. Increasing revenue alone cannot satisfy the missing condition.

Why this follows from the evidence

A trace distinguishes evaluated, skipped, and jointly required conditions. A counterfactual asks which input change would change the outcome under the same rule.

GTM Lab

Saved locally

Review Policy · 0 of 8 sections started

Saved locally to your browser.

Case evidence

Complete evidence, unreadable result

Outcome: Not a prospect
Inputs displayed: 11, with values and sources
Inputs that look positive: 9
Rule that decided: The second one evaluated
Time spent reconstructing: 40 minutes, by two people

In this prepared example, eleven inputs are displayed with values and sources. Nine look positive, but the decision trace is missing, so a reviewer cannot tell which conditions were reached.

Review workbench

Reveal the trace, then change one input

Reveal which rules this record reached. Then change the threshold evidence and an unrelated field; compare the resulting paths.

The result is “not a prospect.” The case says rule 2 was evaluated after an account-match check. A checked-but-not-matched rule and a rule skipped after a short circuit are different states.

What changes if revenue was above the threshold?

Unrelated change: what if the website was updated yesterday?

Bounded counterfactual · current result versus proposed inputsCompare the original state with the proposed change. This preview does not change live records.

Bounded counterfactual · current result versus proposed inputs
Item	Before	Proposed	Why
Revenue threshold input	Below threshold · rule 2 matches and short-circuits	Below threshold · same short-circuit result	This is the field named by the deciding rule in this case.
Website last updated	Not used by the stated qualification rules	Unchanged · still not used	An unrelated change should not be described as a cause.

Revenue threshold input: BeforeBelow threshold · rule 2 matches and short-circuits; ProposedBelow threshold · same short-circuit result; WhyThis is the field named by the deciding rule in this case.
Website last updated: BeforeNot used by the stated qualification rules; ProposedUnchanged · still not used; WhyAn unrelated change should not be described as a cause.

Changes save in this browser as you work.

Optional: inspect the chapter check choices

Work the case · 0 of 2 sections drafted

Inspect the trace and decisive conditions

Compare these alternatives one section at a time. Check a choice to see its consequence; the draft summary below keeps the proposed changes together.

Step 1 of 2

The evidence is visible, but the result is still hard to explain. What should the trace add?

Fewer inputs, showing only the ones that matteredWhich rule or conditions explain the result, and which steps were not reachedA weight on each input showing how much it contributed

This is a proposed draft until the chapter check runs. Selecting a choice alone does not complete the chapter.

2c · Proposed

Review record draft

Review record draft · current draftCompare the original state with the proposed change. This preview does not change live records.

Review record draft · current draft
Item	Before	Proposed	Why
The evidence is visible, but the result is still hard to explain. What should the trace add?	No saved change in this exercise draft	Not drafted yet	Choose a proposal to see what it would add to the draft.
A reviewer is looking at a nurture classification. What can an honest counterfactual add?	No saved change in this exercise draft	Not drafted yet	Choose a proposal to see what it would add to the draft.

The evidence is visible, but the result is still hard to explain. What should the trace add?: BeforeNo saved change in this exercise draft; ProposedNot drafted yet; WhyChoose a proposal to see what it would add to the draft.
A reviewer is looking at a nurture classification. What can an honest counterfactual add?: BeforeNo saved change in this exercise draft; ProposedNot drafted yet; WhyChoose a proposal to see what it would add to the draft.

A choice appears here as a proposal, not as evidence that a live system changed.

Your place saves as you go.

Chapter 2 of 80 complete