> ## Documentation Index
> Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://deepline.com/docs/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.

# Deal risk review

> Review active-pipeline evidence for stalled or under-covered deals. Produce a ranked review queue; do not automate outreach or mutate the CRM.

[Human guide: work with your agent →](https://deepline.com/docs/human/plays/signal-deal-risk.md)

> [!NOTE]
>
> Produce an evidence-linked deal review queue without changing commercial
> stages automatically.

Use this page for active-deal review, not prospecting. It helps an owner turn
CRM evidence into a ranked queue for human review. A risk indicator is a reason
to investigate. It is not a reason to contact someone, update a record, or
change a forecast automatically.

> [!NOTE]
>
> Deal risk is a **Play**. It compares pipeline history, activity, coverage, and
> dates to make a judgment. A CRM-event Monitor can supply new rows, but it does
> not calculate or label deal risk.

Shared evidence, ownership, suppression, and contact-safety rules live in
[Signal playbooks](https://deepline.com/docs/plays/signal-playbooks.md). Apply those rules before any
follow-up.

## Ask an agent for a review queue

```text theme={"languages":{"custom":["/languages/deepline-prompt.json"]}}
/deepline-gtm Review open deals in the enterprise pipeline. For each candidate,
return the evidence, observed date, deal owner, and one proposed next review.
Check activity recency, stakeholder coverage, stage duration against this
pipeline's history, close-date changes, and competitor mentions. Do not send
messages, update the CRM, or change the forecast.
```

## Review indicators

Use only evidence your CRM actually records. Set time windows, stage-duration
baselines, and escalation owners for the specific pipeline. This page does not
impose generic thresholds.

| Indicator | Evidence to retain | Reviewer decision |
| - | - | - |
| Activity gap | Last relevant meeting or activity and the deal's current stage | Is this an expected pause or a follow-up risk? |
| Stakeholder gap | Associated contacts and recent participant history | Does the deal have enough verified coverage for its current stage? |
| Stage-duration outlier | Entry date and the comparable pipeline-stage baseline | Does the owner need to requalify, update the stage, or document why it remains open? |
| Close-date movement | Previous close dates and the reason for each change | Is the timeline still supported by evidence? |
| Competitive evidence | Dated note, call record, or source attached to the deal | Does the owner need a reviewed competitive response? |

For contact and account events outside an active deal, use the trigger-specific
guides in [Signal playbooks](https://deepline.com/docs/plays/signal-playbooks.md) instead of adding another
pipeline-risk rule here.

## Produce a reviewable outcome

**1. Bound the review**

Select one pipeline, a defined set of open deals, and a period whose records
the reviewer can access. Do not mix unrelated pipelines or historic deals
into the same baseline.

**2. Attach the evidence**

For each candidate, retain the underlying activity, contact, date-change,
stage, or competitive record. Keep missing fields and uncertain matches in
the result rather than inferring a cause.

**3. Route one owner decision**

Return the deal, the indicator, its evidence, and one proposed review for
the owner. The owner decides whether to investigate, requalify, update the
record, or take no action.

> [!TIP]
>
> A useful output is a review queue, not an unexplained risk score. Every row
> should make its evidence and proposed next review visible.

## Related pages

* [Champion tracking](https://deepline.com/docs/plays/signal-champion-tracking.md): contact-movement
  evidence outside an active deal.
* [Competitive intelligence signals](https://deepline.com/docs/plays/signal-competitive-intel.md):
  competitive evidence and its review boundary.

## Verify this task

Check the selected pipeline, comparison window, source activity, and proposed owner review. Keep missing evidence visible.

Ask your agent to explain a failed check before repeating work or expanding the scope.


This documentation is built and hosted on [Mintlify](https://mintlify.com), a developer documentation platform.