Reconcile an unknown builder lead source by comparing the original inquiry, captured campaign fields, buyer statements and existing CRM history. Record each observation separately, preserve its raw value and approve only the correction its evidence supports. AgAI Labs proposes this exception ledger so missing evidence stays visible in your monthly report.
What does an unknown source mean?
Unknown means you cannot support the source claim for the field under review. It does not mean the inquiry lacks value. Start each exception by naming the question: first discovery, the current inquiry path or a later return visit. Those questions can have different answers.
Keep four evidence lanes. Self-reported discovery records what the buyer says. Captured campaign fields hold the values saved with an inquiry. Session dimensions describe the analytics session being examined. The current CRM source shows the label already assigned. A value in one lane does not automatically answer another lane's question.
| Value | Meaning in this proposed ledger | Required handling |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | The requested origin has insufficient evidence. | Keep the question open or close it without a correction. |
| Direct | A captured label in the inspected system. | Preserve its field and scope. Do not substitute it for first discovery. |
| Unavailable | The evidence cannot be inspected. | Record the access or capture gap, without assigning a channel. |
Google Analytics uses (not set) when it lacks information for a dimension. That placeholder is distinct from your ledger's unknown decision. See Google's explanation of missing dimension values. Its default channel definitions also define Direct using source and medium rules. Neither label establishes how a particular buyer first heard about you.
Which evidence can support a correction?
Use evidence that answers the specific field question and connects to the inquiry through an existing, verified record relationship. A saved form receipt can support its captured campaign value. A buyer's dated answer supports reported discovery. A confirmed event record supports an event touch. Keep the broader field design in your builder lead tracking workflow.
A report total is not an inquiry receipt. An increase in event traffic cannot identify which buyer returned. Similar times, devices or page choices do not establish a record match. Do not construct identities from browser characteristics or hidden tracking. If the existing records cannot support a match, keep the inquiry evidence unavailable.
Copy this CSV header into your builder-controlled worksheet. Use one row per observation, with repeated inquiry IDs when several evidence lanes exist. Add a field name to every observed value. Keep the worksheet separate from any live CRM change until review.
inquiry_id,observed_value,evidence_source,capture_time_and_timezone,conflict,permitted_inference,decision,reviewer,retained_raw_value
"EXAMPLE-ID","field: value","receipt or record reference","YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM UTC offset","question or none","supported statement only","hold or approved field correction","review role","original literal or restricted evidence reference"The header defines the ledger columns. Use inquiry ID for traceability, not a buyer's name. Observed value includes the field and its scope. Evidence source points to the inspected receipt, message or export row. Capture time and timezone describe when the observation was recorded. If that differs from the event time, record both and label them.
Conflict states what disagrees. Permitted inference limits what the evidence can establish. Decision names the field to keep, correct or hold. Reviewer identifies the accountable role in this public example. In your internal worksheet, identify the responsible person. Retained raw value preserves the original literal or its controlled evidence reference.
A blank export cell is a raw observation. Record it as blank rather than silently converting it to Direct. When an export omitted the field entirely, write unavailable and name that limitation. These entries lead to different capture repairs.
How do you compare conflicting records?
Review the question before ranking the evidence. A campaign value and a buyer statement can both be accurate because they describe different moments. A disagreement becomes a correction only when evidence supports changing a defined field. The referral tracking guide explains how an introduction remains separate from earlier discovery.
- Freeze the observation. Save the inspected values and evidence references before proposing an edit.
- Confirm the record relationship. Use established inquiry references and supplied contact records. Hold uncertain matches.
- Align the time basis. Keep the original timezone and distinguish submission, conversation and export times.
- Separate the evidence lanes. Compare reported discovery, campaign capture, session data and the current CRM label.
- Write the permitted inference. State the narrow fact each observation supports. Mark unsupported origins unknown.
- Review the proposed decision. Name the field, evidence, reviewer and reason. Preserve the previous value.
- Record implementation separately. After an authorized correction, verify the resulting field and retain the decision history.
What does a fictional reconciliation look like?
Everything below is fictional, including IDs, dates, labels and outcomes. It illustrates worksheet decisions, not results from a builder account. All capture times use UTC. The four rows represent three inquiries, because inquiry F-103 contains conflicting discovery statements.
| Inquiry ID | Observed value | Evidence source | Capture time and timezone | Conflict | Permitted inference | Decision | Reviewer | Retained raw value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F-101 | Campaign fields blank; CRM source: Social | Form receipt R-101 from an untagged link; CRM export | 2026-10-20 14:10 UTC | Social label lacks supporting evidence | The receipt contains no campaign tags; origin is unproven | Propose current inquiry source: Unknown | Intake reviewer | Blank campaign cells; Social |
| F-102 | Event touch confirmed; return inquiry campaign blank; CRM source: Direct | Confirmed prior event entry E-102 and return receipt R-102 | 2026-10-21 16:30 UTC | Direct hides earlier event history | The inquiry follows a known event touch; first discovery is unproven | Keep return label; add event touch; discovery Unknown | Intake reviewer | E-102; blank; Direct |
| F-103 | Reported discovery: Search; campaign source: event-card | Form receipt R-103 | 2026-10-22 09:15 UTC | Later discovery statement differs | The form reports Search; the inquiry captured event-card | Keep campaign capture; hold discovery | Source reviewer | Search; event-card |
| F-103 | Reported discovery: Neighbor; session evidence unavailable; CRM source: Search | Dated conversation note N-103; inspected export lacks session evidence | 2026-10-23 11:00 UTC | Discovery statements disagree | A later statement differs; neither establishes chronology | Discovery Unknown, conflict open; current CRM label pending review | Source reviewer | Neighbor; unavailable; Search |
For F-101, the proposed correction removes an unsupported channel claim. It does not assign the untagged link to another campaign. For F-102, the event is a known touch, not proven first discovery. For F-103, preserve both statements and ask which happened first. The captured campaign remains a separate observation.
When should the source remain unknown?
Leave the source unknown when the evidence is missing, the inquiry match is uncertain or the chronology remains disputed. A reviewer can close an investigation as unresolved. Closure means the inspected evidence did not answer the question, not that a channel has been ruled out.
Record a bounded next action, such as checking an existing receipt or asking a neutral clarification during an expected conversation. Avoid leading questions that supply the preferred channel. Do not delay the buyer's project response while attribution waits.
Keep capture repairs separate from historical corrections. Fixing tomorrow's link tags does not prove yesterday's source. An analytics aggregate describes a group, without a verified relationship to this inquiry. It cannot supply the missing identity or origin of an individual buyer. Record that limit instead of selecting the largest channel.
How does the ledger feed the monthly report?
Feed reviewed decisions into the monthly lead source report using a stated cutoff. Count inquiries separately from observation rows. F-103 remains one inquiry despite its two ledger entries. Separate approved corrections, unresolved conflicts and unavailable evidence.
Keep original and corrected source totals distinguishable when a review changes a prior period. Identify the affected inquiry IDs and decision dates. An unresolved case stays in the unknown group for the field being summarized. A pending proposal does not become a completed CRM correction.
Assign measurement repairs through the Lead attribution stage. Your report can name missing campaign capture or unclear intake wording without assigning speculative credit. This worksheet proposes a builder review practice. It does not describe a platform requirement or a new service commitment.
What else should you know about source exceptions?
Can an untagged link prove a social source?
An untagged link alone cannot prove a social source for a builder inquiry. Keep its captured fields and inspect existing inquiry evidence. Leave the origin unknown if no record supports the channel.
Should an event visit replace first discovery?
A confirmed event visit supports an event touch. It does not establish first discovery unless the inquiry evidence answers that separate question. Preserve the return inquiry and earlier history.
Can a monthly analytics total resolve one buyer's source?
A monthly analytics total cannot establish one buyer's source without a verified connection to the inquiry. Use totals as reporting context and keep unsupported individual attribution unknown.
What happens when two buyer statements conflict?
Preserve both buyer statements, their dates and the field question. Request a neutral clarification when appropriate. Keep discovery unknown while chronology remains unresolved, and retain captured campaign evidence separately.