Findings

Documentation Index

Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://docs.conformly.ai/llms.txt

Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.

​

What a finding is

A finding is one specific gap the AI pipeline identified between your document and a standard’s requirements. Every finding has:

• Standard + clause — e.g. “ASPICE 3.1 SWE.4” or “ISO 26262-6 §9”
• Title — short label
• Description — what’s wrong, in plain English
• Severity — Critical, High, Medium, or Low (driven by safety classification, capability level, and the underlying gap type)
• Remediation status — Open, In Progress, Resolved, Accepted
• Suggested fix — concrete recommendation from the AI
• Source document + page — where the finding came from
• Cross-standard claims — when the Knowledge Graph detects that the same evidence affects clauses in other standards

Findings are stored independently of the analysis run that created them, so they survive re-analyses, document updates, and workspace reorganisation.

​

The Findings page

Open it from the sidebar. You see a table with all findings in your current workspace, filterable by:

• Severity — Critical / High / Medium / Low / All
• Remediation — Open / In Progress / Resolved / Accepted / All
• Standard — only shown when you have findings from multiple standards
• Product — only shown when you have products defined
• Document — only shown when you have findings from multiple documents
• Free-text search

All filters are URL-state, so you can bookmark or share a filtered view. The table also has a free-text search box for searching titles and descriptions, plus the standard column-header click to sort.

​

Severity vs Remediation — the most common confusion

Severity is the AI’s risk assessment of the finding itself. It answers “how bad is this gap?” and is based on safety classification (ASIL), capability level distance from target, and gap type. You cannot change a finding’s severity — it’s a fact about the finding. Remediation is your team’s workflow state on the finding. It answers “what action have we taken on this gap?” and you change it manually as work happens. The four states are: “Accepted” is a valid audit outcome. ISO 26262 explicitly allows risk acceptance for non-safety-critical findings with proper rationale. Use it sparingly and with documented justification — auditors will ask why.

​

The status column header reads “Remediation,” not “Status”

This is deliberate. “Status” is jargon — it’s unclear whether it means the AI’s verdict or the team’s workflow state. “Remediation” is unambiguous: it answers “what have we done about this?” Hover the column header in the Findings table for an inline tooltip explaining the four values.

​

Bulk actions

Select multiple findings using the checkboxes in the leftmost column. Once you have a selection, the bulk action bar appears at the top:

• Bulk update remediation — change all selected findings to a new state
• Bulk export — download as CSV
• Bulk dismiss — mark as Accepted with a single click

Useful when triaging a fresh analysis result with 50+ findings.

​

Discussion threads

Every finding has its own comment thread. Open by clicking the row to expand it — the discussion appears at the bottom alongside the suggested fix and the page reference. Anyone with Editor or above can post comments. Viewers see the discussion but cannot post. Use comments for:

• “I disagree with this finding — see section 4.3 of the doc”
• “Assigned to @pat to fix in next sprint”
• “Linked to JIRA-1234”
• “Resolved by commit abc1234 — please re-run analysis”

Comment authors can delete their own comments. Workspace admins can delete anyone’s comments. The full edit history isn’t preserved — if you need formal change tracking, use your existing change-management system and link to it from the comment. Comments survive re-analyses. So when a new analysis re-detects the same finding (because the document hasn’t been updated yet), the existing discussion is still attached.

​

Verifying a resolved finding

When you mark a finding as Resolved, Conformly offers an optional “Verify Resolution” check that re-runs a lightweight analysis on just that finding’s clause and confirms the document now satisfies it. The check looks at the latest version of the source document — so the intended workflow is:

1. Mark the finding Resolved
2. Update the source document
3. Re-upload the document (Conformly detects the version change)
4. Click Verify Resolution on the finding

If verification passes, the finding gets a green “Verified” badge that auditors can rely on. If it fails, the finding flips back to In Progress with a note explaining why.

​

Exporting findings

From the Findings page, click Export → CSV (or PDF for the formatted report). The CSV includes every field including the comment count and verification status. The PDF is the same data formatted for an audit review meeting.

​

Asking the AI for help

Each finding has an “Ask AI” button that opens a chat panel scoped to that specific finding. The AI has access to:

• The finding itself (title, description, severity, suggested fix)
• The source document (so it can quote specific sections)
• The relevant standard clause
• Your prior conversation in the same thread

Use it for things like:

• “Show me what ‘bidirectional traceability’ means in ISO 26262”
• “Suggest exact wording for the change request”
• “What evidence would actually satisfy this clause?”
• “Is this finding related to any other gaps in the same document?”

The AI’s answers are not stored as part of the finding itself — they live in the chat thread only. If you want a piece of AI output to become an action item, copy it into a comment.