Deforestation Due Diligence AI Agent

What this agent does

Prepares the file, never the declaration

A consignment is planned, and Article 4(1) wants a statement lodged before placing or exporting.

A plot is supplied, and Article 9(1)(d) wants geolocation for every plot behind that commodity.

Reason

A plot sits in a named country, and Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1093 classifies its risk.

A consignment is scored, and Articles 10 and 11 want assessment first, then mitigation.

A consignment moves downstream, and Regulation (EU) 2025/2650 lifts the statement duty there.

Decide

A consignment leaves a micro or small holding, and 2025/2650 allows one simplified declaration.

A year closes, and Article 12(2) wants the system reviewed and the records held five years.

Out

A statement is lodged, and Article 6 lets a representative submit while the operator answers.

Execute write actions only inside the approval boundaries agreed during implementation.

→ Product statement

The agent assembles the file and tracks the Article 12(2) review. A named person at the operator, or an Article 6 authorised representative, lodges the statement — and the operator stays responsible either way.

Example workflow

One consignment, plots to lodging

AgentHuman

1Consignment evidence receivedPurchase records, plot coordinates, supplier declarations or legality documents

2Consignment context assembledThe commodity, its heading, the country of production and the plots it was grown on

3Diligence file draftedThe plots, their coordinates, the gaps and completeness

4Controls appliedGeolocation-completeness checks, country-risk checks, date checks and completeness confidence

No human action required

Stages 1 to 4 run unaided, and nothing is lodged at any of them — the agent is assembling, and the sourcing lane opens at the completeness gate.

5DecisionSplits at the completeness gate

Evidence sufficient

Goes to the operator or its authorised representative to lodge.

Anything thin

Adds a sourcing analyst read first.

Sourcing review

The file is held with its consignment, its plots and the gaps between them.

Lodge · Append evidence · Send to sourcing review

Lodged — under Article 4(1)▼

6Supplier and plot records updatedOnly where write access and records policy allow it

7Outcome evaluatedGeolocation coverage, risk scoring, analyst corrections and what the review found

Corrections

Each sourcing correction is counted in the evaluation.

What should not run autonomously

Human approval stays in control

Outside the boundary — human approval required8 items

Lodging the statement under Article 4(1).

Concluding that risk is no more than negligible.

Reviewing the diligence system, Article 12(2).

Appointing a representative under Article 6.

Automation boundaryAgent acts unaided

✓Bind each consignment to the plots that produced its commodity.

✓Check that Article 9(1)(d) geolocation is complete for every plot.

✓Score country risk against the published benchmarking.

✓Track the Article 12(2) review and the record retention.

Nothing is lodged or declared except by a named person, inside the agreed boundaries.

Judging whether production was legal in its country.

Telling a competent authority the file is complete.

Deciding the risk class a country is worked at.

Changes to supplier, plot or legality records.

Example output

One consignment, annotated

Application opens 30 December 2026 for large and medium operators and 30 June 2027 for micro and small enterprises; this record is what one consignment carries beforehand.

Diligence file · single consignmentIllustrative example

Consignment

Recorded as

Commodity

Evidence of record

Confidence

Held for

Cocoa butter inbound, Article 9(1)(d)

Plot given as a village name, no coordinates

Cocoa, derived

Supplier declaration, 3 August 2026

Held unlodged

The operator or its authorised representative

As receivedRead off the supplier declaration and the purchase record, and no further than those two reach.

What the record holds Supplier declaration Plot coordinates Legality document

Why no lodging hereWhether the statement may be lodged is an Article 4(1) act for a person.

ActionLodgeAppend evidenceSend to sourcing review

What the score decidesBelow the configured threshold the file picks up a sourcing read before it is lodged.

Value

Where AI adds value

The same four claims, placed at the point in the workflow where each one applies.

Where the value landsValue 01 – 04

Every consignmentFrom the plots behind it

03Evidence

Where the evidence is used

Our supply-chain traceability agent answers where a lot went; this page answers whether that lot may be placed on the market at all. The forced-labour import evidence agent is UFLPA at the US border about labour; this is a positive declaration before the EU market about land — different market, different regulator, different evidence.

01Approved path

A plot, and who says so

Article 9(1)(d) wants coordinates for every plot, and Article 33 puts the statement in the Information System launched 4 December 2024 and reopened in June 2026.

02Human review

What was checked, and not found

The Annex II declaration wording could not be retrieved verbatim, and it is not established that Annex II carries a signature or name-and-function block; EUR-Lex renderings truncated ahead of the annexes on every attempt, and only Commission pages confirm the substance — no or only negligible risk. This page rests on Article 4(1) and the Article 12(2) review instead.

04Build an evidence trail

The consignment, the plot it came off and the person who lodged it stay on the statement.

Integrations

Typical integrations

Five system groups connect to the same agent. Which of them are in scope is decided in discovery.

Purchase and supplier recordsERP · supplier portal
Consignments and commodities

Plot and geolocation dataGIS files · coordinates
Plot polygons and points

Legality and certificationPermits · scheme records
Country-of-production evidence

Agent

Deforestation diligence file

Reads the plots
Assembles the evidence
Holds for the operator

Risk and benchmarkingCountry classification
Article 12(2) review dates

Observability & evaluationOpenTelemetry · Langfuse
Supported monitoring/evaluation sources

Integration availability depends on the client's existing systems and API access.

Agent controls

Six tests between the model and the lodging

Six tests, and a consignment must pass every one of them. What comes through is charted in the map below.

L6 · Outermost — last line of defenceInward → L1 · closest to the model

L6Rollback / safe modeNarrow the agent to evidence assembly when evaluation or production signals degrade.Roll back

L5Version monitoringTrack model, prompt and sourcing rules; Regulation (EU) 2025/2650 of 19 December 2025 entered into force on 26 December 2025.Track

L4TraceabilityRecord each consignment, its plots, the country of production and every read of the file; Article 12(2) holds the records five years.Record

L3Operator releaseHold the file for the operator or an Article 6 authorised representative; the hold governs release, not whether risk is negligible.Gate

L2Scope guardrailsTest the file against Articles 4, 9, 10 and 11; the draft delegated act on product scope is proposed and has not been adopted.Restrict

L1Confidence thresholdsRoute a thin file to a sourcing read first; COM(2026) 191 final of 4 May 2026 rules out further amendment of the basic legal text.Require review

Model coreEvidence assembled — the consignment, the plots, the risk score and completeness

L1 – L2Test whether a file may stand

L3Puts the lodging in a person's hands

L4 – L5Keep the consignment and the plot behind it

L6Holds the statement unlodged when signals degrade

How Nestack evaluates it

Evaluate the whole assembly — not only the diligence file that comes out.

Coverage runs the whole depth of the workflow, and every layer is cut by slice.

Surface — the file an authority reads

Depth of coverage ▼

E1Final-output evaluationDid the file record what each consignment actually carried?

E2Step-level evaluationDid the agent read the right plot, the right country and the classification in force?

E3Tool evaluationDid it read and write the correct consignment record and the correct plot?

E4Confidence calibrationDo low-confidence files actually attract more sourcing corrections?

E5Slice evaluationHow does performance change across specific commodities?

E6Business outcomeHow many files needed a correction before the operator lodged?

Floor — the file the operator answers for

Failure modes

Where each failure originates in the agent

Seven failure modes, each placed at the stage where it first shows.

Agent lifecycleDirection of processing →

01 · Retrieval1 mode

JP-03

Stale plot record read

The coordinates read are not the ones now supplied.

Stage gathersThe plots, the country, the risk and the dates

02 · Reasoning2 modes

JP-04

Plot asserted, not shown

A plot is called covered without its coordinates.

JP-06

Draft act read as adopted

The proposed product scope is worked as binding.

Stage proposesThe plots, their risk scores and completeness

03 · Tool / write2 modes

JP-02

Thin file passed forward

A file moves on without the sourcing read.

JP-05

Evidence bound to wrong plot

A record is filed against the wrong plot.

Stage writesOnly where write access and approval policy allow it

04 · Output1 mode

JP-01

Lodged, evidence unrecorded

The statement shows a lodging but not what supported it.

Stage returnsThe file an operator lodges and an authority reads

05 · Change / Version1 mode

JP-07

Silent scope regression

A configuration change moves the scope, not the file.

Stage tracksModel, prompt, sourcing rules and evidence fields

Sev-1 · a statement lodged on no plots Sev-2 · wrong evidence reaches the file Sev-3 · source degrades, file holds unlodged

See the complete Food & Beverage failure-mode catalogue →

Affected slices

Cocoa absorbs the corrections

A consignment-level plot-provenance figure can read clean while cocoa carries most of the rework. Nestack reports the correction rate by commodity, not only in total.

Slice performance — reported separately, not only in aggregateIllustrative example

Slice	Failure rate	Lift	Status
Cocoa butter, paste and powder	8.7%	3.6×	Review
Green and roasted coffee	6.2%	2.6×	Review
Palm oil and its fractions	3.9%	1.6×	Watch
Wood packaging and paper	1.4%	0.6×	Normal

Bar: correction-rate lift vs. wood-packaging baseline · scale 0–4.0× · tick marks the 2.0× review threshold 2 of 4 slices over threshold

Evidence-linked improvement

What a missing polygon costs

A cycle ends when the plotless consignment is a standing case. That suite is what the next statement assembled is measured against.

Improvement cycle · five stagesSwitchback — the path turns at Improve and returns at Learn

01Detect

Correction rate rises on cocoa consignments.

02Diagnose

The plot that arrived as a village name where the rule wanted coordinates is read back until one cause remains.

03Improve

Changes leave numbered, and the consignments that forced them travel attached.

04Verify

One consignment case still failing is enough to stop the whole release.

05Learn

The case is kept, and the sourcing rules are rewritten alongside it.

Learn → DetectThe return edge. The next file is measured against a suite one case longer.

Typical build scope

Twelve workstreams across six weeks

The build scope read against the delivery timeline. Week structure follows the six-week plan — discovery, sources, evidence assembly, evaluation, integration, then production validation and handover.

Workstream Week 1Week 2Week 3Week 4Week 5Week 6

01Commodity-scope and automation-boundary discovery.

02Plot, supplier and legality sources.

03Consignment-to-plot and country-risk-class mapping.

04Plot and geolocation ingestion.

05Consignment, plot and record binding.

06Completeness scoring and review routing.

07Operator lodging workflow.

08Supplier and plot-system integration.

09Geolocation and risk cases.

10Guardrails and lodging controls.

11Consignment-trail instrumentation.

12Deployment, documentation and Agent Care handover.

12 workstreams · 6 weeks · bar shows the weeks a workstream is active — several run in parallel Final scope and sequence confirmed in discovery

Engagement tiers

What each tier includes

Rows are the capabilities named in each tier's scope. Higher tiers include everything below them.

Capability✓ in scope · — not at this tier PilotOne commodity, one country ProductionProduction diligence workflow AdvancedMultiple commodities / countries

Introduced at Pilot

Evidence assembly to your consignments✓✓✓

Operator or representative release✓✓✓

Plot-provenance baseline✓✓✓

Introduced at Production

Reporting by commodity—✓✓

Lodging workflow in your systems—✓✓

Approved write-back—✓✓

Supplier-record integration—✓✓

Introduced at Advanced

Multi-country sourcing——✓

Cross-commodity evidence packs——✓

Large plot registers——✓

Multi-country risk controls——✓

Build price From $5,000 From $8,000 Custom quote

Final build priceConfirmed after discovery based on integrations, workflow complexity, consignment volume, approval controls and deployment requirements.

Separate from buildBuild pricing is separate from recurring Agent Care, which covers managed monitoring, evaluations, incidents and verified improvements after launch.

What we need from you

What you bring, and what we build with it

Each input maps to a piece of build scope and a week in the delivery timeline.

You bringWe build with it

01Your commodities in scope and the countries behind them → Commodity scoping and consignment captureWeek 1

02Representative plot, supplier and legality records → Record binding, risk logic and the evidence baselineWeek 2

03Your geolocation data under Article 9(1)(d) → Plot mapping, consignment binding and the automation boundaryWeek 1

04Access to relevant APIs, feeds or exports → Plot, supplier and legality-source assessment, then integration setupWeek 2

05Statements you would not want checked → Risk cases and the evaluation suiteWeek 4

06What no diligence statement may guarantee → Completeness scoring, review routing, guardrails and release controlsWeek 3

07A named person at the operator to lodge → Lodging workflow, then pilot and production validationWeeks 5–6

Nothing else is required Deployment, documentation and Agent Care handover are ours.

Delivery timeline

Four phases across six weeks

Each bar is sized to the weeks that phase really needs, and the fifth of them therefore doubles up.

Phase W1W2W3W4W5W6

Discovery W1

Build W2 – W3

Evaluate W4 – W5

Pilot & Launch W5 – W6

Week focus W1Diligence workflow discovery, plot mapping and the automation boundary W2Source integration and the plot-provenance baseline W3Evidence assembly, risk logic and release controls W4Evaluation suite, geolocation cases and failure-mode testing W5Record integration, pilot consignments and targeted corrections W6One sourcing season run under the authorised representative, then Agent Care handover

Reading the bandEvery band runs only across the weeks its own work is named for. The fifth takes on two because the work does.

At the end of W6When the plot record validates, Agent Care picks the agent up.

DurationSix-week plan shown · typical delivery 4–6 weeks depending on scope confirmed in discovery.

Next step · Food & Beverage AI agent

Build a deforestation diligence agent ahead of 30 December 2026.

Show us one consignment and the plots behind it. Not a lot history. A positive declaration before the EU market, under Article 4(1), that the land was never cleared. Large and medium operators apply from 30 December 2026, four months out. Traceability is a different agent.

Discuss this agent →

Nestack Agents · Deforestation diligenceAGT-FB-16 · Agent Care available after launch