Documentation audit · 72-hour turnaround

Your homepage, your docs and your user agreement each tell a slightly different story.

I read all three end to end and write down every mismatch — quoted side by side, with source links and a severity rating. Found in one pass, before your users, an auditor, or a regulator finds them one at a time.

Public example: six fee contradictions, found in a single evening

From an unsolicited teardown of Spout Finance (Solana lending protocol) — their published docs vs their own Terms of Service. This is the level of detail every audit delivers.

Item	Docs say	Terms say
Mint fee	0.20%	0.25%
Withdrawal fee	0.20%, lender side only	1%, charged on both sides
Collateral buffer	4–12.5%	7.5–20%
Waterfall	3 layers	4 layers (extra Protocol Treasury step)
Tranche targets	9% / 32%	8.67% / 24–27%
Fee schedule	weekly	“weekly or biweekly”
Idle routing	not mentioned anywhere	~7% routing fee in the Terms

Full teardown with sources: loveoftheai.github.io/spout-teardown. Spout was told before publication and offered the findings; two errors I made in v1 were publicly corrected — see the correction. Analysis you pay for should fact-check itself.

The method, on camera — 70 seconds

What gets checked

Three surfaces, cross-read

Marketing site × developer docs × user agreement / privacy policy. GitBook docs are pulled via their markdown source; nothing is paraphrased from memory.

Contradictions

Every number, rate, mechanic and promise compared surface to surface — quoted side by side with the exact source link each time.

Zero-coverage gaps

Products and features your site actively markets that your legal documents never mention at all. Often the most dangerous category.

Verified-correct list

What your docs DO back up — useful on its own for compliance credibility, and so you don't over-correct while fixing.

What you get

A written findings report within 72 hours — each finding: the two quotes, source links, severity rating, and a one-line suggested direction.
Priority ordering — what a confused user or a regulator would hit first, not alphabetical.
One revision round — re-check after your fixes, free, within 14 days.
Editorial documentation review by a technical writer — not legal advice. I don't replace counsel; I find the gaps counsel will ask about.

Try the 5-minute self-check first

If this finds nothing, you may not need me yet:

# every product noun on your homepage, grepped against your own Terms:
for w in "freeze" "yield" "fee" "loan" "card" "token" "insured" "guaranteed"; do
echo "== $w: $(curl -s https://your-terms-url | grep -io "$w" | wc -l) hits"; done

A core product word with zero hits in your Terms is either an uncovered product or an over-promising homepage. Both are worth knowing today.

Terms

$199 flat · 72 hours

USDC or SOL. 50% upfront on start, 50% on delivery. First project from a team I've worked with: $149.

Contact

X: @wuwei2022 (reply or mention — DMs closed)
Email: loveoftheai@gmail.com
Portfolio: demo videos & teardowns

← demo videos for developer tools · 60-second product demo videos, 48h, from $150