Quicker review of technical reports

Qrtr is a document quality assurance platform for professional services firms. It checks reports, proposals and other deliverables against the brief, cited references, reasoning and quality requirements, and records every result in an audit trail for sign-off. Qrtr produces evidence. Reviewers and approvers make the decisions. It runs in the browser and inside Microsoft Word.

AI document review assesses a document against a defined set of quality requirements rather than reading it the way a person would. Qrtr checks each requirement, citation and claim individually, records what was met, what was not and why, and presents the findings for a human reviewer to act on. The reviewer decides. The system supplies the evidence.

Yes. Qrtr assesses a deliverable against the requirements in the brief, RFP or scope of work and reports each requirement as met or not met, with the supporting evidence from the document. This catches missed requirements before the client does, which is where most rework and reputational cost comes from.

No. Qrtr handles the systematic checking that consumes senior review time: requirements coverage, citation accuracy, internal consistency, unsupported claims. Reviewers then spend their time on professional judgement, which no software should be making for them. Every human decision in Qrtr is explicit, attributed and recorded.

A deterministic check returns the same result every time it runs on the same content. That matters in professional services because a quality decision you cannot reproduce is a quality decision you cannot defend. Qrtr is built so identical content produces identical results, and every assessment is bound to a specific document version and quality profile so the result can be re-examined later.

Record everything, and bind every result to what produced it. Each Qrtr assessment is tied to a specific document version and a snapshot of the quality requirements in force at the time. Every finding, human decision and override is logged with who made it and when. If a deliverable is questioned a year later, the full assessment history is there.

Grammarly checks grammar and Copilot generates content. Qrtr verifies content. It checks a deliverable against the brief, the cited standards and its own internal reasoning, then records the results for review and sign-off. Generation tools made drafting faster and left the review burden where it was. Qrtr exists for the review burden.

Four things. Requirements: whether the deliverable addresses what the brief or scope demands. References: whether citations to standards and sources are accurate. Reasoning: whether claims are supported, consistent and free of contradiction. Style: placeholders, inconsistent terminology and structural drift. Each finding names the passage, the problem and the severity.

Because generation moved faster than verification. Drafting a report got quicker, checking one did not, so the review load concentrated on the most senior and most expensive people in the firm. AI review tools like Qrtr take on the systematic checking so senior engineers review judgement, not formatting and cross-references.

Yes, that is the firm Qrtr is built for. At that size a consultancy has real review obligations and real sign-off risk but no dedicated quality team to absorb them. Qrtr gives those firms a repeatable review process with an audit trail, without adding headcount or a heavyweight quality management system.