@elitedcs/ghl-mcp 3.72.2 → 3.73.0

package/CHANGELOG.md

@@ -1,5 +1,68 @@
 # Changelog
 
+## 3.73.0 — the assessment, for Command OS licensees
+
+An agency's first paid conversation with a prospect, and the document that comes out of
+it. This is Command OS only: on the $97 licence these five tools answer with upgrade
+information, and nothing about the GoHighLevel product changes.
+
+You sit down with a business owner and go through forty-six questions across eleven
+areas — what a job is worth, what happens to the phone, what happens after a quote goes
+out, who is sitting in their database doing nothing. Each question has the words to say
+out loud and a follow-up for when the answer is vague. At the end you have their numbers,
+what those numbers are costing them each month, how many hours a week are going into work
+a system should do, and a report you hand over with your name on it and nothing of ours.
+
+Three rules are enforced in the code rather than left to good intentions, because all
+three are the kind that quietly stop being true when a report needs to look impressive:
+
+- **An answer nobody knows omits its finding.** It is never defaulted, estimated, or
+  filled in from an industry average. The report says which numbers were missing and what
+  to measure first.
+- **Assumptions are yours and they print beside the figure they moved**, not in a footnote.
+  Set one to zero and its finding disappears rather than falling back to a default.
+- **There is no minimum number of findings**, and "there is not much here" is a verdict the
+  tool will actually reach and say plainly. A report that always finds something will
+  invent something.
+
+`save_assessment` puts the whole thing in **your own** GoHighLevel — the prospect as a
+contact, the answers as a note you can read in plain English, the deal on an Assessments
+pipeline. We store none of it. That is also what lets someone else on your team pick it
+up: they open the GoHighLevel they already log into.
+
+`read_assessment_transcript` turns a recording into answers, and refuses anything the
+owner did not say: every answer must carry their verbatim words, and those words are
+checked against the transcript. Anything worked out rather than heard — "two or three a
+week" becoming eleven a month — is held for you to confirm.
+
+`write_assessment_report` writes the finished document to your machine, self-contained so
+it opens anywhere, with a random filename and no-index because it holds another business's
+revenue and customer numbers. We publish it nowhere; the host is yours.
+
+## 3.72.3 — the waits in a built account can actually go live
+
+Blueprint builds a client's account and then asks whether to publish the workflows or
+leave them as drafts for review. Say publish, and the ones with a wait of a day or more
+were refused by GoHighLevel and stayed as drafts. The build still reported them as
+created, so the account looked finished when the follow-up sequences were not running.
+
+The cause was one word. GoHighLevel takes `minutes` and `hour`, but for days it wants
+`days`, and we were sending `day`. It is not a rule you can guess: a workflow that is
+nothing but a wait accepts the singular quite happily, which is why this went unnoticed.
+It only fails on the shape a real nurture has, a message followed by a wait, which is
+every follow-up sequence the presets build. **123 of the waits in the shipped presets
+were affected.**
+
+Workflows already in an account are untouched and keep working; this was only ever about
+newly built ones.
+
+**The second half is the reporting.** A workflow that could not be published was still
+counted as built, and the summary read the same as a run where nobody asked to publish at
+all: it suggested turning on publishing, to someone who had just turned it on. The real
+reason sat further down the report where nobody looks first. A build now says plainly
+which workflows could not be published, what GoHighLevel said about each, that they are
+sitting as drafts and not running, and that repeating the build will not help.
+
 ## 3.72.2 — a form you read back can be saved again
 
 A subscriber tried to edit one of her forms the documented way: read it with