# Why Forematter won't guess

> Jack on why Forematter never guesses: sourced answers with date and owner, gaps sent to a named person only if the employee chooses, replies saved so the gap closes.

Source: https://forematter.com/notes/why-forematter-wont-guess/
Published: 2026-09-29
Author: Jack Stovell (https://jstov.uk/)

I'll say the unfashionable thing first. I think an AI assistant at work should be allowed to say "I don't know", and I'd rather it did than pretend.

The reason is simple, really. At work, people act on what they read. Someone asks a question about leave, or expenses, or what happens on their first day, and whatever comes back looks like policy. So they treat it like policy. A form gets missed, and a manager gets contradicted. A confident answer from an unapproved source, or from no source at all, is worse than no answer, because nobody stops to double-check something that sounds sure of itself.

"I don't know" is different. It's a bit annoying, sure. But it at least prompts someone to go and ask a person, and that's the outcome you actually want.

## No approved source, no answer

I'm writing this because I'm building Forematter, onboarding software for UK companies, and this is the decision everything else hangs off. Forematter is in development and not open to customers yet, so I can't point you at results or numbers (and I won't dress anything up as if I could). What I can do is tell you [what it's designed to do](/how-it-works/), and why I care about it so much.

It answers using only the documents an admin has approved, plus facts people have confirmed. Nothing scraped from somewhere vague, nothing filled in to be helpful. And if the evidence isn't good enough, it says so, rather than making something up and hoping.

That last bit is the point. Hoping is not a strategy for telling someone how much notice they need to give.

## Every answer shows its source, date and owner

Here's the thing about an answer: it's only as good as the document behind it. If you can't see that document, you can't judge it. Is it current? Is it the real policy or a draft someone abandoned? Who would I even ask?

So every answer in Forematter shows three things: the source document, when it was last updated, and who owns it. Anyone reading can see at a glance whether this is something to act on or something to check. It's a small habit, but I think it changes how people relate to the answer. They stop trusting it blindly and start trusting it for a reason.

Admins have a say in this too. They can mark documents as canonical, approved, informational, historical or unverified, and set a review date. So an old handbook page doesn't quietly sit there pretending to be current. Anyway, the labels matter less than the principle: the assistant should know what it's standing on, and so should you.

## A gap goes to a named person, and you choose to send it

Now, saying "I don't know" and stopping there would be a bit rubbish. It leaves the person stuck, and probably back to pinging someone in a chat and interrupting their afternoon.

So when the evidence isn't good enough, Forematter offers to send the question to a named person, instead of inventing an answer. It goes to whoever owns the topic. If there's no obvious owner, it goes to the person's manager (or an admin). The owner is the one who can actually fix the gap, which is why it should land with them and not vanish into a void.

But here's the part I feel strongly about: nothing is sent unless the employee chooses to send it. They see who it's going to and exactly what gets shared, and nothing goes anywhere until they say so. That single question and their name go to the owner so they can reply, and it goes nowhere else. The [trust page](/trust/) spells out exactly what's shared.

I mean, it's their name on it. Asking a question at work can feel exposed enough already, especially when you're new and worried the answer is something you ought to know. Nobody should have a question fired off on their behalf without them knowing. The employee decides, every time.

## The reply closes the gap for the next person

The owner replies, or passes it to someone who knows, and the reply lands back in the same conversation. So the person who asked isn't hunting through their inbox for it.

And then comes my favourite bit. An admin can publish that reply as a saved answer, so the next person who asks doesn't wait at all. The gap just closes.

That's what stops it being a one-off patch. Without this step, the same question gets asked over and over, and someone answers it over and over, and nothing improves. With it, each question that couldn't be answered can become a bit of documentation that didn't exist before.

There's a nightly report too, of the questions your documentation doesn't answer well. I think of every one of those as a signal, not a failure to hide. It's your company telling you where the handbook has holes. You could pretend they aren't there, or you could fix them, and I know which I'd rather do.

So that's why Forematter won't guess. A wrong answer that sounds right is the most expensive thing an assistant can give you, and "I don't know, but here's who does" costs nothing at all. Well, almost nothing. Just a little pride.