Audits AI-enriched CRM data for trustworthiness rather than just presence: flags fields with no source lineage recorded, enrichment stale past a freshness threshold, and per-source override rates, only judging a source once it has enough volume to mean something.
A field getting filled in and a field being correct are two different things. AI can enrich a CRM at a scale that makes 'the field got populated' a nearly meaningless quality signal on its own.
An 18-row synthetic enrichment log across 4 sources: one clean source, one genuinely noisy source with enough volume to judge, one stale-data source, and a deliberately small-sample source with a 100% override rate used to test that the sample-size guard actually holds.
1/1
High-override sources correctly flagged
1/1
Small-sample source correctly withheld
2/2
Stale fields caught
The one source most likely to look alarming on a raw override-rate ranking was the one the tool correctly refused to judge.
Its override rate is still reported, but it's marked as an insufficient sample rather than flagged as a problem. A source with 2 enrichments and 1 correction isn't evidence of anything yet.
Not necessarily. It can also mean that field type is inherently hard to enrich, job titles change constantly, static firmographic data doesn't. Check what field types are driving the rate before dropping a source.
Runs against your CRM using your own credentials, through your own AI instance. We don't copy, store, or retain your data.