This decision point keeps teams out of the wrong review path. The next step is determined by what remains unresolved after proof and diligence, including when mission context or deployment boundary make the review stricter.
Start with the lightest path that can still answer the right question: The site does not push every capable visitor into the deepest process. It reduces ambiguity until the next move feels technically justified.
Escalate only when the unresolved question actually changes: If the remaining question is still product truth, do not jump to strategic-partner language. If the remaining question is deployment boundary or mission consequence, do not hide it inside a generic access form.
Treat path selection as part of the trust model: A visitor sees that G‑14 understands the difference between product evaluation, architecture evaluation, and consequential deployment review.
What still needs to be proven?: Entry-product proof, control model, deployment posture, and operator boundary are different questions. The path needs to match the question instead of burying it.
What would make the next step wasteful?: If a team would arrive in access or strategic collaboration still unclear on the published case, the decision path needs to send them back toward proof, docs, or briefing first.
What becomes sensitive or environment-specific?: The moment the answer depends on mission context, sovereignty, or program-specific deployment facts, the conversation moves from public explanation into direct private review.
VaultDesk / product access: Choose this when the main unresolved question is whether the entry product is real in product form. You do not need a long architecture session first if the immediate question is governed secure action in practice.
Technical briefing: Choose this when the team understands why governed machine action matters but still needs the architecture, trust model, and proof contract clarified before engineering time is worth spending.
Strategic collaboration: Choose this only when the entry product already makes sense and the remaining question is strategic fit, deeper integration, or whether G‑14 becomes infrastructure inside your environment.
High-assurance review: Choose this immediately when mission systems, sovereign constraints, private-cloud or air-gapped deployment, robotics, or other sensitive conditions materially change the evaluation standard.
