Scoped observation
Use only permitted states needed for the diagnostic.
Supervised AI commerce operations for multi-merchant teams
Find the real cause of commerce incidents—across every system.
Rootspan investigates the catalog, feed, storefront, app, and channel states behind recurring commerce incidents. It assembles the evidence, proposes a safe correction, and defines verification under human approval.
Illustrative investigation · synthetic dataRead-only by default · Evidence linked · Human approved
CASE-CONCEPT-017Promotion price diverges across the stack
Illustrative investigation · synthetic dataPermitted state
01
Commerce catalogSource
$9902
Promotion appPermitted app state
$7903
Structured dataStorefront
$9904
Feed overrideChannel feed
$79Evidence timeline
$99Catalog base price
$79Approved campaign intent
$99Destination-visible evidence
$79Channel-specific override
Selected hypothesisStorefront offer is stale
Proposed correction
Structured offer price- 99.00+ 79.00
Illustrative investigation using synthetic data. The commerce catalog reports $99 at 09:02, the promotion app reports $79 at 09:04, structured data reports $99 at 09:07, and the feed override reports $79 at 09:09. The selected hypothesis is a stale storefront offer. The proposed correction changes the destination-visible structured offer from $99 to $79 for 14 synthetic variants, remains subject to human approval, retains a rollback, and is verified by re-observing the storefront and destination.
Read-only by default Evidence linked Human approval before action Complete audit trail
The operational gap
The alert is only the beginning.
A destination can name the symptom. It rarely tells your specialist which upstream state, transformation, or override actually produced it.
PRICE_MISMATCH
“Landing page price does not match submitted price.”
Destination symptom01
Commerce platform
Base offer remains at $99
02
Promotion app
Campaign intent changes to $79
03
Structured data
Rendered offer remains at $99
04
Feed override
Channel submits $79
05
Destination
Crawler observes a disagreement
The investigation loop
Trace the incident to its real source.
The design-partner workflow keeps evidence and authority visible from first observation through recovery.
- 01Observe
Observe permitted state
Read scoped states from the systems already involved—without taking control away from them.
- 02Assemble
Assemble evidence
Preserve each source, timestamp, authority label, and disagreement instead of flattening them.
- 03Trace
Trace the causal chain
Connect the destination symptom to the transformations and overrides that could have produced it.
- 04Approve
Propose and approve
Present the smallest exact diff, evidence basis, blast radius, and rollback for human review.
- 05Verify
Verify and learn
Re-observe the affected states, record the receipt, and retain the case for recurrence analysis.
One concrete incident
Four prices. One symptom. A chain of evidence.
The point is not noticing a mismatch. The point is reconstructing the competing values, authority, stale layer, narrow correction, and verification plan.
CASE-CONCEPT-017Promotion price diverges across the stack
Illustrative investigation · synthetic dataPermitted state
01
Commerce catalogSource
$9902
Promotion appPermitted app state
$7903
Structured dataStorefront
$9904
Feed overrideChannel feed
$79Evidence timeline
$99Catalog base price
$79Approved campaign intent
$99Destination-visible evidence
$79Channel-specific override
Selected hypothesisStorefront offer is stale
Proposed correction
Structured offer price- 99.00+ 79.00
Illustrative investigation using synthetic data. The commerce catalog reports $99 at 09:02, the promotion app reports $79 at 09:04, structured data reports $99 at 09:07, and the feed override reports $79 at 09:09. The selected hypothesis is a stale storefront offer. The proposed correction changes the destination-visible structured offer from $99 to $79 for 14 synthetic variants, remains subject to human approval, retains a rollback, and is verified by re-observing the storefront and destination.
HYPOTHESIS
The promotion intent and feed agree at $79, while the storefront's structured data remains at the $99 base price.
AUTHORITY BASIS
Campaign intent is treated as authoritative for this synthetic case only; an operator must confirm authority in a real diagnostic.
VERIFICATION
Re-observe the rendered offer and destination response after propagation; close only when both report $79.
Portfolio leverage
Your team keeps authority. Rootspan does the reconstruction.
Repeated specialist work compounds across merchants: pull the same screenshots, compare the same sources, re-establish the same timeline. Rootspan’s direction is to make that reconstruction reusable while preserving the systems, feed tools, workflows, and client permissions you already operate.
Explore the case recordMerchant portfolioRecurring incident patterns
P1Catalog → feed driftScoped review
P2Promotion propagationEvidence ready
P3Identifier lineageScoped review
P4Destination visibilityScoped review
Controlled access
Every conclusion should show its evidence.
Permission boundaries are part of the operating model—not a footer promise added after the workflow is designed.
Review security & permissionsEvidence-linked conclusions
Retain the source, observation time, and authority basis.
Proposed diffs
Show the exact field change and affected entities before action.
Explicit approval
No external write occurs without the accountable operator.
Verification receipts
Re-observe the destination and preserve what happened.
Excluded sensitive data
Credentials, payment data, and customer PII are not required.
Accountable founder
Built for the gap between commerce systems.
Dennis Koshta is the founder and software engineer building Rootspan. The focus is the operational work that begins after a tool raises an alert: reconstructing what each system believed, why the states diverged, and what a safe recovery would require.
Why RootspanQuestions worth asking
Specific answers, without the pitch fog.
Is Rootspan another feed validator?
No. Feed checks are useful, but the operating thesis starts where a validator stops: reconstructing which upstream system, override, or destination state produced the incident.
Does Rootspan make changes automatically?
No. The design-partner workflow is read-only by default. A correction is proposed as an inspectable diff, and external action requires explicit human approval.
What data is needed for a first conversation?
Only a description of the recurring workflow. Do not send exports, credentials, customer information, payment data, or sensitive incident details through the website.
Does this replace our commerce or feed tools?
The product direction is to work above the systems your team already operates, preserving tool ownership, client authority, and specialist judgment.
Private design-partner program
Start with one recurring incident.
Bring the workflow, not the data. In 20 minutes, we’ll map where the evidence lives, why the reconstruction repeats, and whether a scoped diagnostic is worth testing.
Book a 20-minute call