EU AI Act readiness — in one day, with evidence
AI Act Desk walks through 31 questions and returns a report a consultant can attach to the compliance file: the classification (Art. 5 / Annex III / Art. 50), a gap list per article and evidence taken from the client’s own audit log — with the file hash. It is a checklist and technical evidence, not a legal opinion, and the report says so in its first lines.
The problem it solves
- The Act requires the classification and the controls to be proven, not described — and the proof is usually not written down anywhere.
- Writing the checklist by article by hand costs a consultant a full day per client.
- A report without evidence from the running system is only an opinion; with evidence it is a document.
What you get
Classification with the reasons
Four levels: prohibited practice (Art. 5), high risk (Annex III), limited risk (Art. 50) and minimal risk — with the reason for every trigger spelled out.
Gap list by article
For every required control: in place / missing / unknown, with the next step. “Don’t know” is treated as a gap, not as an answer.
Evidence from the system
From the client’s audit log: runs, approvals requested and decided, blocks and executions, plus the file’s sha256 — so it is clear the file was not edited afterwards.
A report for the file
A Markdown file to attach: classification, gap list, evidence, the list of attachments and the next step. Downloaded with one click.