Harmonyk — Fair-Use Policy (DRAFT)
DRAFT — LLM-GENERATED PRELIM — NOT LEGAL ADVICE — NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNTIL REVIEWED BY A QUALIFIED LAWYER. Prepared 2026-10-20 by LegalDraftWing. Companion to the Terms of Service (the ToS incorporates this policy —
[LAWYER: incorporation mechanics]). Ceiling numbers marked [NUMBERS PENDING] await the CreditsWing/revenue design pass; the ceiling shape below is drafted so a numbers change never re-opens this document.
Source key: [ECON …] = docs/2026-10-20-pricing-economics.md (the economic receipt, per PricingWing's 2026-10-20 handoff) · [QS …] = docs/2026-10-19-saas-spec-question-sheet.md · [LEDGER …] = tickets/LEDGER.md. Founder rulings relayed by PricingWing are marked [her words].
1 · The promise: "Uncapped" has a precise meaning
Our top tier is Uncapped. It means: no monthly quota on the things that matter — no document-create cap, no message cap that walls you mid-flow. It does not mean "unlimited", and the word "unlimited" never appears in our copy (QS Q13 wording law — "unlimited" promises unlimited, including the 41-agent MCP swarm pointed at a workspace; printing it signs a contract we cannot honor).
This policy is the other half of "Uncapped": the ceilings where fair use ends. It exists because the founder wants it to — her ruling, 2026-10-19 night [her words, via PricingWing]: the fair-use clause is "perfect chefs kiss … without some cover someone could drain the company LMAO xP". Real cover, written in the open.
Why any ceiling exists (the honest math, from ECON §6.1): a sustained automation-heavy workspace running at the Pro envelope costs $72–145/month in LLM alone against $90 of revenue (with the cost-routing dial on), and at full stress profiles up to $288.60 against $90. The ladder is priced on realistic usage (40–50% of allowance, ECON §2.6); the fair-use clause is what covers the tail. We would rather print this math than hide a surprise throttle.
2 · The ceiling shape (numbers where they're decided, shape everywhere else)
One unit, defined in the open: a Maestro message is a message (ECON §5.2, QS Q2). No credit packs, no mixed units.
| # | Ceiling | Shape | Number | Basis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Messages (top tier) | No monthly quota; abusive automation may be throttled | Soft anchor 10,000 msgs/mo per workspace — [NUMBERS PENDING] (her new monthly shape 50/100/250/uncapped may re-scale it; drafted as shape, not printed number, per PricingWing) | ECON §5.3 — stress cost at the envelope $72–145/mo vs $90 revenue |
| 2 | Review trigger (THE named trigger) | A human conversation — never a silent wall | Workspace blended model-cost run-rate > ~$60/mo for 2 consecutive months → we reach out [NUMBERS PENDING] | ECON §5.3 guardrail; enforcement lever = existing custom_limits/expires_at machinery (lib/billing/entitlements.ts) — no new law needed |
| 3 | Burst rate | Per-organisation rate ceiling | ~10 messages/min burst [NUMBERS PENDING] | QS Q18 abuse register rec |
| 4 | Playbook runs | Runs metered once each (one-meter doctrine); step ceiling per run | ≤25 steps per run (QS Q8); run envelopes [NUMBERS PENDING] (ECON priced 50/500/2,000 by tier) | QS Q8 + PricingWing handoff |
| 5 | Documents (paid tiers) | Uncapped for normal workspace use; bulk automated ingestion beyond X files/day may be throttled [NUMBERS PENDING] | Unit cost is tiny ($0.00048/doc embedding + ~32KB storage) but unbounded in aggregate — the abuse case is a 20k-file auto-sync | ECON §2.4 + PricingWing handoff |
| 6 | Free tier documents | 250 documents — lifetime ("ever"), not per month. Deletion does not restore it | 250 [FOUNDER CONFIRM — chronology note (PricingWing 2026-10-20): the 250-ever draft (2026-10-19 night) is the NEWER word and supersedes the OLDER 250/month anchor (2026-10-19 ~11:09Z) provisionally — "the newer word wins unless the walk-through reverts it"; it arrived as "I was thinking…", not a final ruling; pending her tier walk-through + CreditsWing coherence pass. Both receipts cited; correction points backward] | her 2026-10-19-night draft shape via PricingWing; T024 mechanic (deletion never decrements) now permanent |
| 7 | Free connector limits (product-side companion) | Visible meters, never hidden gates | Imports ≤10/day · airlift manifest ≤25 files/run · mailbox body reads ≤20/day · trigger runs 0 on free | LEDGER CONNECTORS-PREP addendum #3 ("we don't even need to hide them") + ECON brutal-free design |
3 · The response story (what happens if you reach a ceiling)
This is the load-bearing section. The ladder below is what we commit to — you will never be billed more than your plan price without choosing it first:
- Visible meters first. The power-meter doctrine: "power meter, not meter taxi" — quotas are shown everywhere (settings, dashboard, inline "N left"), never hidden (
ECON §5.2,QS Q12). - Gentle guidance. Nudges toward the cost-routing dial (Quick/Deep), usage tips, and per-feature soft walls before anything global (
ECON §5.3). - The named review trigger (ceiling #2). Sustained usage above the fair-use envelope gets a human conversation — a person contacts the workspace owner to understand the use case and agree a shape (an enterprise-style custom limit, a plan change, or an explicit carve-out). Never a silent wall, never an invoice (
ECON §5.3). - Agreed limits only. If we can't agree, we may apply temporary limits via the existing entitlement machinery (
custom_limits/expires_at), with notice and with your content fully readable and exportable — data is never held hostage (QS Q17). Throttling for abusive automation (§2 rows 1/3/5) may be applied directly and immediately where the pattern is machine-generated and clearly not human use. - Escalation for real abuse. The Acceptable Use Policy's enforcement ladder covers scripted drains, signup farms, and the free-tier-as-margin-attack class.
4 · What we will never do (the "no surprise bills" architecture)
- No auto-top-ups. No per-credit packs. No metered-on-top agentic charges. The Retool $0.10/credit shape, the M365 metered-on-top shape, and the Notion credits backlash are explicitly the models we reject (
ECON §4complaint corpus — "every loudest complaint in the set is a billing-model complaint"). - Overage is a choice, never a surprise. Upgrade doors appear at the moment of need; nothing converts automatically (
ECON §5.2). - Ceilings don't move retroactively. Material changes to this policy get notice and a dated version; the version you accepted governs your current term (ToS §12).
- "We don't surprise-bill you" is our one-liner against the whole market set (
ECON §4, fresh-eyes #13). This policy is what makes the line true.
5 · Enterprise
Off-deck contracts get custom ceilings, custom limits, and custom terms (QS Q7: enterprise = contract variant). This policy's shape still informs the conversation; the contract governs.
6 · Enforcement & questions
Fair-use interventions are proportionate (visible meters → conversation → agreed limits; see AUP for abuse). If you think a ceiling got it wrong: [FOUNDER: support contact — QS Q25 named-email recommendation]. A human will look.
[LAWYER — enforceability questions this draft cannot answer: (a) is a one-sided fair-use ceiling enforceable as incorporated ToS terms in the target jurisdictions? (b) consumer-protection fairness review of "abusive automation may be throttled" discretion vs. B2B custom; (c) required notice periods for limit changes; (d) whether the named review trigger creates an expectation of service (i.e. does promising "a human conversation" bind us to staffing it?).]
Fact sources for this document
ECON §2.4/§2.6/§4/§5.1–5.3/§6/§12.3 (all cost figures, meter law, complaint corpus, guardrail) · QS Q2/Q7/Q8/Q12/Q13/Q17/Q18 · LEDGER T024 (deletion-doesn't-restore mechanic) + LEDGER CONNECTORS-PREP addendum #3 (brutal-free visible limits) · PricingWing handoff 2026-10-20 (founder wording "without some cover someone could drain the company LMAO xP"; free=250-docs-ever draft shape; ≤25 steps/run; doc-shaped abuse bullet) · repo lib/billing/entitlements.ts machinery (cited by PricingWing as the enforcement lever).