In development · nothing on this page is available yet
A tenant drifts exactly the way a planning setup drifts. Owners leave, policies stop matching how people actually work, and connections outlive the reason they were created. We intend to apply the same evidence-first checks here that we already run against D365 planning data. None of it is built. This page exists so you can judge the direction, not so you can buy it.
The failure patterns are the same objects with different names. That is the whole reason this family is on the roadmap rather than a different one.
| Pattern | In D365 planning — running today | In Azure and Power Platform — intended |
|---|---|---|
| Nobody is accountable | Active item with no planner, or a planner code pointing at somebody who has left | A flow or app with no owner, or an owner who has left the organisation |
| Configuration nobody revisited | A coverage group that was set at go-live and never reviewed | A data loss prevention policy or environment setting written for a way of working that has moved on |
| Reality gap | Configured lead time of 30 days against receipts averaging 70 | An environment or licence provisioned for one pattern of use against how it is actually used |
| Orphan object | An item with no supplier | A flow with no owner, or one whose connection references something that no longer exists |
| Risky dependency | An item sourced from a single supplier whose confirmations do not hold | A business process depending on one personal connection or one unmanaged connector |
There is no environment scanner, no flow health check and no governance report. We have not written them, so we are not going to describe them as though we had. The checks listed above are patterns we intend to reuse, and the specific rules behind each one do not exist.
The honest status of every step beyond the local check is on the how it works page.
The method is not a promise — it is running against real planning data structures right now, free, in your browser. If you want to know whether we would build something useful for your tenant, look at what we built for planning: named objects, quoted numbers, stated impact, an owner, and an honest confidence figure.
It reads D365 planning extracts, not Azure or Power Platform data. It will not tell you anything about your flows.
[PLACEHOLDER: the actual scope of this family when work starts — which Azure services and Power Platform environment types, which checks, and what data would be read. The internal architecture names only “flow health, environment checks” with no detail behind it, so nothing more specific is stated here.]
[PLACEHOLDER: how the data would be obtained without breaking the no-transfer promise — a local export, a read-only admin connection, or something that runs inside the customer's own tenant. This is the design question that decides whether the family is worth building at all.]
[PLACEHOLDER: whether to publish a target date. There is none today, and a date on this page would be the first thing on the site that is not verifiable.]
The planning check is free, runs in your browser and transmits nothing. It is the only honest evidence we can offer that the same approach would be worth having in your tenant.