Hey Chief Notes fam! 👋 I'm Kazi and I'm happy to be here. I help local service and e-commerce businesses get more customers, mainly through Google Ads. My current focus is using AI to automate my client delivery so I can get better results without spending all day on manual tasks. 💪 What I'm currently building: I've been building an ICM setup to handle my content and video pipeline: 1. A research & angle generator that pulls real customer pain points and search queries. 2. A scriptwriting workflow that drafts high-intent video scripts and short-form posts. 3. A browser-based animation pipeline that takes voiceover audio and generates rendered reels automatically. 🤔 My biggest question right now: Tying the whole pipeline together smoothly—specifically connecting the generated video assets directly to auto-scheduling across platforms without running into manual bottlenecks. If anyone here has built automated distribution or approval flows for short-form video, I’d love to know what tools or setups worked best for you. Looking forward to connecting with everyone here! 🚀

Last week I posted part one of Second Eyes (https://www.skool.com/cliefnotes/i-expected-a-second-ai-from-another-company-to-catch-more-it-caught-less?p=4179abfc. Quick recap... I planted 288 mistakes in 12 renovation cost estimates and had Claude, ChatGPT and Gemini review them in the browser, 180 reviews in all. A second AI from a different company didn't catch more than a second Claude. Two Claude reviews caught 84%, and Claude plus another company caught about 82%. A few of you asked the obvious next question. What about the tools people actually use? So I tested mine. WHY THIS ONE My everyday setup is Claude Code for the work and Perplexity as my second set of eyes. Claude Code is the version of Claude that can write and run code, so it can recompute every number instead of reading it. Perplexity picks the model for you and can search the web. If any setup was going to beat "ask Claude twice," I figured it would be this one. WHAT I DID Same 12 sheets, same 288 mistakes, same prompt and answer key as part one. Claude Code reviewed every sheet 5 times with all my personal settings switched off. Perplexity reviewed every sheet 5 times in incognito on its "Best" setting. That's 120 reviews, all on the same day. Before any data came in, I wrote down what would count as a win. Perplexity as the second look had to catch at least 5 points more than a second Claude Code review. WHAT CAME BACK Claude Code plus Perplexity caught 83.8% of the mistakes. Claude Code plus Claude Code caught 83.2%. Half a point. The 5-point gain is ruled out. On its own, Perplexity caught about 72% and Claude Code about 77%. And Claude Code caught about the same as the regular Claude chat from part one, 77% against 79%, even though it ran Python on every single sheet. The part I found most interesting... Perplexity and Claude miss different things. Perplexity was better at catching work done in the wrong order. It was much worse at catching numbers that contradict each other across the sheet, and claims that weren't true. But when I paired them, those differences mostly cancelled out. A second Claude Code review picked up about as many new mistakes as Perplexity did.

Time for a quick intro! Hey Clief Notes fam! 👋 I’m Aaron, and I’m stoked to be here. 🙋 **A little about me:** I work in marketing, operations and automation. I enjoy figuring out how to make things simpler and more efficient. 🎯 **My current goal:** Get more done with less back-and-forth, build reliable systems, and free up more time for my family. 💪 **What I’m currently building/working on:** Putting AI to practical use in my day-to-day workflow. My focus is getting simple, useful solutions finished without turning every task into a massive project. 🤔 **My biggest struggle or question right now:** Knowing when to stop planning and ship. How are you getting consistent results from AI without spending all your time managing it or adding features you don’t actually need? Let’s get it! 🚀

I built a front door to my ICMs because I was tired of hunting through chats to find my own work. One place to see what each project is for, when to use it, its recorded status, and the next step. The work stays in its existing project. Untested skills stay separate until I test them. For now, it’s navigation and instructions, not an autonomous launcher. The goal is less remembering where everything lives and more actually using it. Clear steps. Less blah blah blah. Just show and tell. 😊

Today I just read the whole paper with my friend, from start to finish, discussing every single detail. If you only glanced at it, I challenge you to actually read everything, from start to finish. And try to understand everything. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2603.16021 Such a great story teller. This paper is an ICM pitch done for you, if you ever need to pitch ICM to a client. Actual references to the claims. Great stuff. The best part isn't even the ICM. It's Section 6.1. "ICM as a Multi-Pass Compilation". These ideas are years ahead of time. This is actually the future of AI. Incredible stuff, I will cite this paper countless times in my own research.