Build the cue sheet from the locked cut and the music documentation, resolve every work, writer and share by identifier, and hold the sheet for the music supervisor who certifies it before filing.
Stages 1 to 4 run unaided, and nothing is filed at any of them — the agent is building, and the supervisor's lane opens at the confidence gate.
5DecisionBranches at the confidence threshold
High confidence
Goes to the music supervisor to certify.
Low confidence
Adds a music clearance read first.
Supervisor certification
The sheet is held with its documentation, its flagged cues and the confidence.
Certify · Amend · Send to music clearance
Certified — released to file▼
6Music systems updatedOnly where write access and approval policy allow it
7Outcome evaluatedAmendments, society queries, distribution timing and adjustment claims raised
Amendments
Every supervisor amendment is counted, including one made after the sheet was filed.
What should not run autonomously
Human approval stays in control
Outside the boundary — human approval required8 items
Filing or transmitting a cue sheet to a society.
Certifying that a cue sheet is true and complete.
Deciding the usage class where the picture is ambiguous.
Agreeing or amending writer and publisher shares.
Automation boundaryAgent acts unaided
✓Build the cue list from the locked cut and the documentation.
✓Resolve each cue to a work, its writers and its publishers.
✓Time cues from the conform and test the rate-class threshold.
✓Flag discrepancies with a stated reason, and hold the sheet.
Any write happens inside the boundaries agreed at implementation, never ahead of certification.
Raising an adjustment claim with a society.
Clearing, licensing or re-licensing a piece of music.
Accepting a delivery deadline for the production.
Changes to resolution, usage or approval rules.
Example output
One cue on the sheet, annotated
Everything the agent builds is attached to the documentation it was drawn from.
Cue-sheet output · single cueIllustrative example
Programme
Cue
Usage type
Source of record
Confidence
Shares
Episodic drama
Opening title music, resolved by identifier to the work
Theme, visual instrumental
Locked cut and cue notes
93%
Writer and publisher, from the agreement
As receivedTaken from the locked cut and the executed agreements on file — nothing on this side is written by the agent.
Documentation usedConformed EDLComposer agreementSync licence on file
Why this usage typeIt is the music that identifies the programme at its opening and a person still decides.
ActionCertifyAmendSend to music clearance
What the score decidesBelow the configured threshold the sheet picks up a music clearance read before it.
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 cueFrom the locked cut
03Reconciliation
Build from the conformed picture
Read the cues that actually aired, and emit the society template alongside CISAC's AVR+ — published 18 June 2026 on Global Cue Sheet Standard 2.0, and still unproven.
01Approved path
No cue sheet, no payment
Performance royalties for audiovisual works are distributed from the cue sheet. There is no other trigger for a broadcast or streaming performance.
02Human review
Put the clocks where they bite
The delivery agreement sets the filing clock and the society sets the quarterly cut-off. One major PRO also publishes an absolute bar on adjustment claims, running from receipt rather than discovery; no other society publishes an equivalent, and none should be assumed.
04Build an evidence trail
The cue, the documentation it was built from and the supervisor who certified stay on the sheet.
Integrations
Typical integrations
Five system groups connect to the same agent. Which of them are in scope is decided in discovery.
Post and editorialConform EDL and AAF Music editor's cue notes
Music and clearanceClearance and licence logs Library and sync confirmations
Society submissionASCAP · BMI template CISAC AVR · AVI · AVR+
Agent
Cue sheets & PRO submission
Reads the cut Builds the sheet Holds for certification
Rights and royaltiesPublishing administration Royalty statement systems
A series-level resolution rate is published by no society, trade body or academic source, and the figures in circulation are vendors' own. Nestack reports the unresolved-cue rate by slice on your slate, not only in total.
Slice performance — reported separately, not only in aggregateIllustrative example
Slice
Failure rate
Lift
Lift vs. threshold
Status
Library and production music
6.8%
3.6×
Review
Late clearance replacements
4.7%
2.5×
Review
Source cues under dialogue
3.2%
1.7×
Watch
Recurring episodic underscore
1.4%
0.7×
Normal
Bar: unresolved-cue-rate lift vs. recurring-underscore baseline · scale 0–4.0× · tick marks the 2.0× review threshold2 of 4 slices over threshold
Evidence-linked improvement
A cycle is not closed by an explanation
A cycle ends when the unresolved cue is a case the next release has to catch. That suite is what the next sheet filed is measured against.
Improvement cycle · five stagesSwitchback — the path turns at Improve and returns at Learn
01Detect
Unresolved-cue rate rises in a cue slice.
02Diagnose
The cue nobody could resolve, and the composer nobody paid, is traced back to the library ID that was keyed by hand.
03Improve
The change leaves with a version, and the cues that found it attached.
04Verify
Every touched cue case runs again, and one fail stops the release.
05Learn
It is held permanently, and the cue rules shift alongside it.
Learn → DetectThe return edge. The next detection runs against a suite one unresolved-cue 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, reconciliation workflow, evaluation, integration, then production validation and handover.
WorkstreamWeek 1Week 2Week 3Week 4Week 5Week 6
01Cue-sheet workflow discovery and boundary work.
02Post and music source review.
03Society format, usage class and share-rule mapping.
04Conform ingestion and cue extraction.
05Work resolution and share binding.
06Confidence scoring and flag routing.
07Supervisor certification workflow.
08Music and society-system integration.
09Resolution and share cases.
10Guardrails and filing controls.
11Cue-trail instrumentation.
12Deployment, documentation and Agent Care handover.
12 workstreams · 6 weeks · bar shows the weeks a workstream is active — several run in parallelFinal 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 tierPilotOne series, one societyProductionProduction music systemsAdvancedMultiple territories / societies
Introduced at Pilot
Sheets built to your documentation✓✓✓
Supervisor certification✓✓✓
Cue-resolution baseline✓✓✓
Introduced at Production
Reporting by series—✓✓
Approval workflow in your systems—✓✓
Approved write-back—✓✓
Post and music-system integration—✓✓
Introduced at Advanced
Multi-society format sets——✓
Multi-stage clearance approvals——✓
High cue volume——✓
Multi-society submission controls——✓
Build priceFrom $5,000From $8,000Custom quote
Final build priceConfirmed after discovery based on integrations, workflow complexity, transaction 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 delivery agreements and their filing clocks→Conform ingestion and cue extractionWeek 1
02Cue sheets you have already filed→Resolution baseline and share-binding checksWeek 2
03Your composer agreements, licences and library terms→Society format, usage class and share-rule mappingWeek 1
04Access to relevant APIs, feeds or exports→Post and music source assessment, then integration setupWeek 2
05Sheets you would not want filed→Adjustment cases and failure-mode testingWeek 4
06What no cue may be filed without→Confidence scoring, flag routing, guardrails and filing controlsWeek 3
07Named supervisors to certify the sheet→Supervisor certification workflow, then pilot and production validationWeeks 5–6
Nothing else is requiredDeployment, documentation and Agent Care handover are ours.
Delivery timeline
Four phases across six weeks
Bands are drawn from the delivery calendar, which is why the fifth holds two phases.
PhaseW1W2W3W4W5W6
DiscoveryW1
BuildW2 – W3
EvaluateW4 – W5
Pilot & LaunchW5 – W6
Week focusW1Cue-sheet workflow discovery, rule mapping and the automation boundaryW2Post and music integration and the resolution baselineW3Reconciliation workflow, confidence logic and filing controlsW4Evaluation suite, share and threshold checks and failure-mode testingW5Society-format integration, pilot episodes and targeted correctionsW6One delivery season run under the music supervisor, then Agent Care handover
Reading the bandEach bar covers only the weeks its work is named in. The week 5 overlap is real work, not padding.
At the end of W6With the season validated, the running agent passes to Agent Care.
DurationSix-week plan shown · typical delivery 4–6 weeks depending on scope confirmed in discovery.
Next step · Media & Entertainment AI agent
Build a cue-sheet agent around the documentation the sheet rests on.
Show us your conform, your music documentation and who certifies. Not a payment delayed — a payment extinguished: one major PRO publishes an absolute bar on adjustment claims that runs from receipt, not from discovery.
