{ "coverage": { "by_status": { "ambiguous": 1, "context_only": 3, "direct": 11, "not_found": 1, "partial": 6, "possible": 1 }, "mapped_or_plausible": 18, "requirements_identified": 20 }, "coverage_explanation": "The authoritative intent is supported by the workbook's own statement at Read Me!B8, not merely by the sheet title: Target Fields is declared to be the requested-object register, while working sheets are described as synthetic illustrations. The register contains 14 requested objects: 10 columns and four measures. Current gold directly observes exact table/column names and data types for all 10 columns. It observes exact names for all four measures, but their descriptions identify them as deterministic fixtures or smoke tests and exact DAX was not established; consequently measure coverage is partial. The current model also directly contains the two relationships implied by the Ledger foreign keys. Supporting workbook concepts outside the register are assessed separately and do not inflate registered-object coverage. Overall structural coverage is high, while production-semantic assurance is materially lower.", "limitations": [ "Only literal non-empty text cells were available from the workbook. Numeric values, formulas and other non-text content were intentionally excluded, so sample balances, formula results, field counts and parameter values cannot be evaluated.", "The workbook is requirements/design evidence, not implementation evidence. Its statement that Target Fields is authoritative is itself a workbook declaration and was used to distinguish registered objects from illustrative sheets.", "Current gold is bounded to the selected current-state, evidence and method pages. A not-found result means not found in the available discovered landscape, not enterprise-wide absence.", "Exact names and data types support strong structural mapping but do not prove source lineage, row-level data quality, business-rule equivalence, calculation correctness, production readiness or report usage.", "The exact DAX expressions of current measures were not established, and all four are described as fixture or smoke-test objects.", "Current gold does not establish calendar row completeness, fiscal-year rollover logic, explicit AUD semantics, exchange-rate policy, budget fact design, or adjustment-classification rules.", "No workbook numeric/formula content was used to infer declared counts or reconcile the illustrative P&L." ], "report_markdown": "# Workbook-to-current-gold assessment\n\n## Apparent requirement\n\nThe workbook declares a core finance reporting design for FY2026\u2013FY2027 (`Read Me!B3`, `Read Me!B6`). It explicitly says that **Target Fields** is the requested-object register and that the other working sheets are synthetic illustrations of grain and report behaviour (`Read Me!B8`, `Read Me!B10`). On that basis, the primary requirement is:\n\n- an `Account` dimension with key, name and type;\n- a daily fiscal `Calendar` with date key, date and fiscal month;\n- a posting-grain `Ledger` with date/account foreign keys, signed reporting amount and adjustment flag;\n- a `Metrics` layer with Actual Net, Actual Revenue, Budget Net and Net Variance;\n- relationships from Ledger to Calendar and Account;\n- July fiscal-year, AUD reporting and signed P&L conventions as supporting semantics.\n\n## Mapping result\n\n### Strong structural alignment\n\nCurrent gold directly observes exact table/column counterparts for every one of the 10 registered columns and matching data types. It also observes active many-to-one relationships from `Ledger.DateKey` to `Calendar.DateKey` and from `Ledger.AccountKey` to `Account.AccountKey` [fde-finance.current-model].\n\n### Measures exist, but production semantics are unconfirmed\n\nAll four registered measure names exist in `Metrics`. However, current gold describes them as deterministic fixture/smoke-test objects and states that their exact DAX and production KPI status were not established [fde-finance.current-model]. Their mappings are therefore partial: the objects exist, but the workbook calculations and business definitions cannot yet be confirmed as implemented.\n\n### Supporting semantics and gaps\n\n- A Calendar table with `DateKey`, `Date` and `FiscalMonth` exists, but current gold does not establish that the fiscal year starts in July. `FiscalMonth` is also configured to summarise by Sum, which should be reviewed [fde-finance.current-model].\n- `Ledger.SignedAmount` exists and is currency-formatted, but current gold does not explicitly establish AUD or the workbook's reporting-sign convention [fde-finance.current-model].\n- Actual Expenses, Budget Revenue and Budget Expenses appear only on the prototype P&L illustration, not in the declared Target Fields register. They are context for intended report behaviour rather than confirmed requested semantic-model objects.\n- Workbook ownership and planned-source statements are design/governance declarations; current gold does not establish source lineage or ownership implementation.\n\n## Evidence boundary\n\nThis is a comparison with the available discovered current-gold landscape, not a statement of enterprise-wide absence. Workbook declarations are requirements evidence, not implementation evidence; exact names and data types establish structural alignment but not full semantic equivalence [fde-finance.evidence-method].", "requirements": [ { "confidence": 0.99, "gold_page_ids": [ "fde-finance.current-model" ], "label": "Account.AccountKey column", "questions": [], "rationale": "Current gold directly observes Account.AccountKey as Int64, matching the registered object name and data type. Its full business semantics and source-master stability are not independently tested, but the discovered structural mapping is exact.", "requirement_id": "R01", "source_cells": [ { "coordinate": "B2", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "C2", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "D2", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "E2", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "F2", "sheet": "Target Fields" } ], "status": "direct" }, { "confidence": 0.99, "gold_page_ids": [ "fde-finance.current-model" ], "label": "Account.AccountName column", "questions": [], "rationale": "Current gold directly observes Account.AccountName as String, exactly matching the registered field.", "requirement_id": "R02", "source_cells": [ { "coordinate": "B3", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "C3", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "D3", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "E3", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "F3", "sheet": "Target Fields" } ], "status": "direct" }, { "confidence": 0.97, "gold_page_ids": [ "fde-finance.current-model" ], "label": "Account.AccountType column", "questions": [ "Should AccountType support the full balance-sheet and P&L classification set illustrated in Chart of Accounts!C4:C13, or only Revenue and Expense as stated in Target Fields!E4?" ], "rationale": "Current gold directly observes Account.AccountType as String. The workbook's representative sheet includes Asset, Liability and Equity as well as Revenue and Expense, so the register definition 'Revenue or expense classification' may be narrower than its own illustration and should be clarified.", "requirement_id": "R03", "source_cells": [ { "coordinate": "B4", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "C4", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "D4", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "E4", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "F4", "sheet": "Target Fields" } ], "status": "direct" }, { "confidence": 0.98, "gold_page_ids": [ "fde-finance.current-model" ], "label": "Calendar.DateKey column", "questions": [ "Should the YYYYMMDD encoding be enforced and tested as a data-quality rule, or is Int64 structural compatibility sufficient?" ], "rationale": "Current gold directly observes Calendar.DateKey as Int64, matching the registered field. The available evidence does not validate every value's YYYYMMDD encoding.", "requirement_id": "R04", "source_cells": [ { "coordinate": "B5", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "C5", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "D5", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "E5", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "F5", "sheet": "Target Fields" } ], "status": "direct" }, { "confidence": 0.99, "gold_page_ids": [ "fde-finance.current-model" ], "label": "Calendar.Date column", "questions": [], "rationale": "Current gold directly observes Calendar.Date as DateTime with a date display format, matching the registered field.", "requirement_id": "R05", "source_cells": [ { "coordinate": "B6", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "C6", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "D6", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "E6", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "F6", "sheet": "Target Fields" } ], "status": "direct" }, { "confidence": 0.98, "gold_page_ids": [ "fde-finance.current-model" ], "label": "Calendar.FiscalMonth column", "questions": [ "Should Calendar.FiscalMonth be set to Do not summarize, and what sort label/order should be used across fiscal years?" ], "rationale": "Current gold directly observes Calendar.FiscalMonth as Int64. Gold also notes that it is configured to summarise by Sum, which is likely inappropriate for a month-number attribute.", "requirement_id": "R06", "source_cells": [ { "coordinate": "B7", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "C7", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "D7", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "E7", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "F7", "sheet": "Target Fields" } ], "status": "direct" }, { "confidence": 0.99, "gold_page_ids": [ "fde-finance.current-model" ], "label": "Ledger.DateKey foreign-key column", "questions": [], "rationale": "Current gold directly observes Ledger.DateKey as Int64 and an active many-to-one relationship to Calendar.DateKey.", "requirement_id": "R07", "source_cells": [ { "coordinate": "B8", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "C8", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "D8", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "E8", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "F8", "sheet": "Target Fields" } ], "status": "direct" }, { "confidence": 0.99, "gold_page_ids": [ "fde-finance.current-model" ], "label": "Ledger.AccountKey foreign-key column", "questions": [], "rationale": "Current gold directly observes Ledger.AccountKey as Int64 and an active many-to-one relationship to Account.AccountKey.", "requirement_id": "R08", "source_cells": [ { "coordinate": "B9", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "C9", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "D9", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "E9", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "F9", "sheet": "Target Fields" } ], "status": "direct" }, { "confidence": 0.98, "gold_page_ids": [ "fde-finance.current-model" ], "label": "Ledger.SignedAmount column", "questions": [], "rationale": "Current gold directly observes Ledger.SignedAmount as Decimal, summarised by Sum and currency-formatted. Explicit AUD and reporting-sign semantics are assessed separately because they are not established merely by the column's existence.", "requirement_id": "R09", "source_cells": [ { "coordinate": "B10", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "C10", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "D10", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "E10", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "F10", "sheet": "Target Fields" } ], "status": "direct" }, { "confidence": 0.98, "gold_page_ids": [ "fde-finance.current-model" ], "label": "Ledger.IsAdjustment column", "questions": [ "What source rule classifies a posting as late or manual, and can both concepts be represented reliably by one Boolean flag?" ], "rationale": "Current gold directly observes Ledger.IsAdjustment as Boolean, exactly matching the registered field. The operational definition of late or manual adjustment is not documented in gold.", "requirement_id": "R10", "source_cells": [ { "coordinate": "B11", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "C11", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "D11", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "E11", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "F11", "sheet": "Target Fields" } ], "status": "direct" }, { "confidence": 0.9, "gold_page_ids": [ "fde-finance.current-model" ], "label": "Metrics.Actual Net measure", "questions": [ "Should the existing fixture measure be replaced or promoted to production logic, and what account-classification/filter rules define signed expense balances?" ], "rationale": "An exact-name currency measure exists, but gold identifies it as a deterministic fixture and does not establish its exact DAX or production KPI status. The workbook calculation 'Actual Revenue plus signed expense balances' therefore cannot yet be confirmed as implemented.", "requirement_id": "R11", "source_cells": [ { "coordinate": "B12", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "C12", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "D12", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "E12", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "F12", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "H12", "sheet": "Target Fields" } ], "status": "partial" }, { "confidence": 0.9, "gold_page_ids": [ "fde-finance.current-model" ], "label": "Metrics.Actual Revenue measure", "questions": [ "Which AccountType or account hierarchy members must Actual Revenue include, and are adjustments included by default?" ], "rationale": "An exact-name currency measure exists, but it is fixture-labelled and its DAX and production semantics were not established. The revenue account inclusion rule remains unknown.", "requirement_id": "R12", "source_cells": [ { "coordinate": "B13", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "C13", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "D13", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "E13", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "F13", "sheet": "Target Fields" } ], "status": "partial" }, { "confidence": 0.88, "gold_page_ids": [ "fde-finance.current-model" ], "label": "Metrics.Budget Net measure", "questions": [ "What is the approved budget source and grain, and should budget be stored in a separate fact table or integrated with actuals through a scenario dimension?" ], "rationale": "An exact-name currency measure exists, but gold describes it as a fixture constant for metadata/DAX smoke testing. No budget fact, source, grain or production calculation is established in the available current-state page.", "requirement_id": "R13", "source_cells": [ { "coordinate": "B14", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "C14", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "D14", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "E14", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "F14", "sheet": "Target Fields" } ], "status": "partial" }, { "confidence": 0.9, "gold_page_ids": [ "fde-finance.current-model" ], "label": "Metrics.Net Variance measure", "questions": [ "Confirm that positive Net Variance is always favourable across revenue and expense views, as suggested by Management P&L!D10." ], "rationale": "An exact-name currency measure exists, but it is fixture-labelled and exact DAX is not established. The workbook defines Actual Net minus Budget Net, which must be revalidated against production measures and the intended favourable/unfavourable convention.", "requirement_id": "R14", "source_cells": [ { "coordinate": "B15", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "C15", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "D15", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "E15", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "F15", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "H15", "sheet": "Target Fields" } ], "status": "partial" }, { "confidence": 0.98, "gold_page_ids": [ "fde-finance.current-model" ], "label": "Ledger-to-Calendar and Ledger-to-Account relationships", "questions": [ "Are unknown-member handling and referential-integrity expectations defined for unmatched account or date keys?" ], "rationale": "The foreign-key definitions imply the two core star-schema relationships. Current gold directly observes both as active, one-direction, many-to-one relationships.", "requirement_id": "R15", "source_cells": [ { "coordinate": "E8", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "E9", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "A2", "sheet": "Fiscal Calendar" }, { "coordinate": "A2", "sheet": "Ledger Sample" } ], "status": "direct" }, { "confidence": 0.86, "gold_page_ids": [ "fde-finance.current-model" ], "label": "Daily calendar grain", "questions": [ "What minimum and maximum dates must the production calendar cover, including the FY2026\u2013FY2027 planning horizon?" ], "rationale": "Current gold observes an explicit Calendar with DateKey, Date and FiscalMonth, plus a Ledger relationship. It does not independently establish completeness at one row per day or the required date range.", "requirement_id": "R16", "source_cells": [ { "coordinate": "A2", "sheet": "Fiscal Calendar" }, { "coordinate": "A3", "sheet": "Fiscal Calendar" }, { "coordinate": "B3", "sheet": "Fiscal Calendar" }, { "coordinate": "C3", "sheet": "Fiscal Calendar" } ], "status": "partial" }, { "confidence": 0.93, "gold_page_ids": [ "fde-finance.current-model" ], "label": "Fiscal year starts in July", "questions": [ "Confirm fiscal-year naming and rollover rules\u2014for example, whether July 2025 belongs to FY2026." ], "rationale": "A FiscalMonth column is observed, but the current-gold page does not establish July as fiscal-year month 1 or document fiscal-year calculation semantics. This is not found within the available discovered boundary, not proof of estate-wide absence.", "requirement_id": "R17", "source_cells": [ { "coordinate": "A2", "sheet": "Fiscal Calendar" }, { "coordinate": "A3", "sheet": "Reference Data" }, { "coordinate": "C3", "sheet": "Reference Data" } ], "status": "not_found" }, { "confidence": 0.72, "gold_page_ids": [ "fde-finance.current-model" ], "label": "AUD reporting currency", "questions": [ "Is Ledger.SignedAmount already converted to AUD, and if so what exchange-rate date, rate type and source are used?", "Is multi-currency reporting out of scope, or will transaction/local currency fields be required later?" ], "rationale": "Current gold observes a currency-formatted SignedAmount, but the format shown is a generic dollar pattern and no explicit AUD currency metadata or conversion policy is established. This supports only a possible, not direct, semantic match.", "requirement_id": "R18", "source_cells": [ { "coordinate": "E10", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "A2", "sheet": "Reference Data" }, { "coordinate": "B2", "sheet": "Reference Data" }, { "coordinate": "C2", "sheet": "Reference Data" } ], "status": "possible" }, { "confidence": 0.82, "gold_page_ids": [ "fde-finance.current-model" ], "label": "Reporting-sign and P&L sign convention", "questions": [ "Confirm the canonical sign convention at source, semantic-model and visual layers, especially whether any account classes require sign reversal." ], "rationale": "SignedAmount and the named net/variance measures exist, but current gold does not document positive-revenue, negative-expense or favourable-positive semantics. Fixture descriptions are insufficient to confirm durable reporting behaviour.", "requirement_id": "R19", "source_cells": [ { "coordinate": "A2", "sheet": "Ledger Sample" }, { "coordinate": "D4", "sheet": "Management P&L" }, { "coordinate": "D5", "sheet": "Management P&L" }, { "coordinate": "D6", "sheet": "Management P&L" }, { "coordinate": "D10", "sheet": "Management P&L" } ], "status": "partial" }, { "confidence": 0.94, "gold_page_ids": [ "fde-finance.current-model", "fde-finance.evidence-method" ], "label": "Additional prototype P&L lines: Actual Expenses, Budget Revenue and Budget Expenses", "questions": [ "Should Actual Expenses, Budget Revenue and Budget Expenses be promoted into the formal requested-measure register, or remain report-only intermediate calculations?" ], "rationale": "These lines appear on a formula-driven prototype sheet, while Read Me states that working sheets illustrate behaviour and Target Fields is the requested-object register. They are not registered measures. Current gold likewise lists only Actual Net, Actual Revenue, Budget Net and Net Variance.", "requirement_id": "R20", "source_cells": [ { "coordinate": "A2", "sheet": "Management P&L" }, { "coordinate": "A5", "sheet": "Management P&L" }, { "coordinate": "A7", "sheet": "Management P&L" }, { "coordinate": "A8", "sheet": "Management P&L" } ], "status": "context_only" }, { "confidence": 0.96, "gold_page_ids": [ "fde-finance.current-model" ], "label": "Planning horizon FY2026\u2013FY2027", "questions": [ "Does FY2026\u2013FY2027 define the minimum data horizon, the delivery roadmap, or both?" ], "rationale": "This is delivery/planning context rather than a registered semantic object. Current gold does not establish data coverage for this horizon.", "requirement_id": "R21", "source_cells": [ { "coordinate": "A6", "sheet": "Read Me" }, { "coordinate": "B6", "sheet": "Read Me" } ], "status": "context_only" }, { "confidence": 0.92, "gold_page_ids": [ "fde-finance.evidence-method" ], "label": "Business ownership and planned-source alignment", "questions": [ "Can the named owners approve definitions and data-quality rules?", "What physical systems or governed data products correspond to the chart of accounts master, enterprise fiscal calendar, general ledger postings and finance semantic calculation layer?" ], "rationale": "The workbook declares owners and planned source domains for design governance. Current gold's bounded semantic-model evidence does not establish source lineage, stewardship approval or operational ownership implementation.", "requirement_id": "R22", "source_cells": [ { "coordinate": "G2", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "I2", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "G5", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "I5", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "G8", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "I8", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "G12", "sheet": "Target Fields" }, { "coordinate": "I12", "sheet": "Target Fields" } ], "status": "context_only" }, { "confidence": 0.97, "gold_page_ids": [], "label": "Materiality threshold for prototype validation", "questions": [ "What is the threshold value, unit and application rule?", "Is materiality required in the production semantic model or only in workbook prototype validation?" ], "rationale": "A MaterialityThreshold parameter and purpose are named, but its value was non-text and deliberately excluded from the extraction. It is also absent from the authoritative Target Fields register, so neither the threshold nor whether it is a production model requirement can be determined.", "requirement_id": "R23", "source_cells": [ { "coordinate": "A4", "sheet": "Reference Data" }, { "coordinate": "C4", "sheet": "Reference Data" } ], "status": "ambiguous" } ], "review_flags": [ { "priority": 1, "queue_name": "client_question", "reason": "Budget Net is required, but the workbook does not identify an approved budget fact/source or grain and current gold only shows a fixture constant.", "subject": "R13" }, { "priority": 2, "queue_name": "revalidation", "reason": "Actual Net exists by name but exact DAX and production status must be validated against the workbook calculation.", "subject": "R11" }, { "priority": 3, "queue_name": "revalidation", "reason": "Actual Revenue is fixture-labelled; production inclusion/filter rules are unknown.", "subject": "R12" }, { "priority": 4, "queue_name": "revalidation", "reason": "Net Variance must be checked against production Actual Net and Budget Net and the favourable-positive convention.", "subject": "R14" }, { "priority": 5, "queue_name": "client_question", "reason": "July fiscal-year-start semantics are declared but not established in current gold.", "subject": "R17" }, { "priority": 6, "queue_name": "client_question", "reason": "AUD is declared, but current gold only establishes a generic currency-formatted amount.", "subject": "R18" }, { "priority": 7, "queue_name": "consultant_review", "reason": "Canonical sign semantics need explicit agreement before P&L measures are productionised.", "subject": "R19" }, { "priority": 8, "queue_name": "mapping", "reason": "FiscalMonth maps directly but is configured to summarise by Sum and should be corrected or justified.", "subject": "R06" }, { "priority": 9, "queue_name": "client_question", "reason": "Clarify whether three prototype P&L lines should become formal measures.", "subject": "R20" }, { "priority": 10, "queue_name": "client_question", "reason": "The AccountType definition conflicts with the broader classifications illustrated in the representative chart of accounts.", "subject": "R03" }, { "priority": 20, "queue_name": "evidence_research", "reason": "Planned source systems and owner approvals are not evidenced by the bounded semantic-model audit.", "subject": "R22" }, { "priority": 25, "queue_name": "scope", "reason": "Confirm that Target Fields remains the approved register and that illustrative working-sheet concepts are not additional scope unless promoted through change control.", "subject": "workbook" }, { "priority": 30, "queue_name": "client_question", "reason": "MaterialityThreshold is named but its excluded non-text value and production relevance are unknown.", "subject": "R23" } ], "summary": "The workbook appears to define a compact core finance reporting model: Account and Calendar dimensions, a posting-grain Ledger fact, four management measures, key relationships, fiscal-calendar semantics, reporting-currency/sign conventions, and supporting governance/source context. Against the available current-gold boundary, all 10 registered business-facing columns have exact structural counterparts and the two implied fact-to-dimension relationships are observed. All four registered measures also exist by exact qualified name, but only as fixture/smoke-test objects whose exact DAX and production KPI status were not established, so their semantic mappings are partial rather than fully direct. July fiscal-year semantics and explicit AUD currency semantics are not established in current gold. Additional P&L lines shown only on the prototype sheet are treated as contextual, not authoritative requested objects." }