Match reporter requests to supplied expert profiles

Proposed inputs

1. Name

   Reporter request

   Owner

   Communications owner

   Minimum scope

   One invented request

   Quality check

   Preserve requested subject and deadline; remove private contact details.

2. Name

   Expert roster

   Owner

   Profile owner

   Minimum scope

   Approved fictional expertise profiles

   Quality check

   Distinguish supported experience from promotional adjectives.

3. Name

   Release constraints

   Owner

   Communications lead

   Minimum scope

   Fictional availability and speaking limits

   Quality check

   A past public quote does not authorize another statement.

Access and setup — proposed or unknown

Proposed minimum

1. Read supplied fictional profiles and stage the fit queue locally.

2. Keep all reporter outreach and profile sharing disabled.

Compatibility unknowns

1. Unknown: attachment parsing and selected Slack destination.

2. Unknown: current expertise, availability and permission to speak for an organization.

External actions requiring approval

1. Connecting email or private documents, sharing profiles in Slack or contacting a journalist.

Why use this

1. A specific request needs specific expertise.

2. Profile-based matching gives reviewers a starting point.

Why an agent / simpler alternative

Useful judgment

Compare request topics with documented experience.

Simpler alternative

Use a manually maintained beat-to-spokesperson table for a small roster with stable, narrow topics.

Unsuitable when

Profiles are unowned, facts cannot be verified or requests involve claims requiring a qualified professional review.

Expected deliverable and review checks

Proposed artifact

Request-to-expert fit queue with unresolved permissions.

Critical checks

1. Tie each potential match to profile evidence.

2. Keep expertise, availability and speaking approval separate.

Missing output evidence

Unknown: no configured agent, actual output or acceptance test was independently inspected.

First check — proposed, unexecuted

Status

proposed_unexecuted

Synthetic fixture

Fictional Q7 asks about warehouse packaging. Profile A describes packaging research but has no current speaking permission; B describes ceramic art. Q8 asks either person to guarantee zero breakages. No real people or reporters are included.

Acceptance checks

1. A may be a topic match but remains held for permission; B lacks supporting expertise.

2. Neither profile authorizes the Q8 guarantee.

3. Return a review queue only; send no Slack or reporter message.

Stop conditions

1. Real personal details or confidential experience enters the fixture.

2. Matching is treated as consent, a guaranteed placement or approval to contact someone.

Failure signals and proposed responses

1. Signal

   A profile has a similar job title but no evidence for the requested topic.

   Why it matters

   A plausible match could imply knowledge the person has not claimed.

   Proposed response

   Hold the pair and ask the profile owner for supporting experience.

2. Signal

   A request asks for a guarantee the spokesperson is not authorized to make.

   Why it matters

   Topic familiarity does not permit commitments or confidential disclosures.

   Proposed response

   Flag the restriction and leave the response unprepared until the communications owner decides.

Effort and cost — unknown

Setup work

1. Verify profile ownership.

Ongoing review

1. Confirm proposed matches and permissions.

Unknowns

1. Unknown: model cost, attachment quality and roster-update effort.

Limits

1. The queue does not validate professional competence, spokesperson consent or likely publication.