The digging done for you. The judgment left to you.
Our research agents pull records from recorders, tax offices and courts, organise what they find, and hand your team a summary where every finding links back to the record it came from.
How much of your researchers' day goes on fetching rather than reading?
Thirty minutes with the engineer who builds these agents. No slide deck.
Six ways the gathering eats the day.
The records live in different places, each office does things its own way, and none of it needs the person who ends up doing it.
- 01 A dozen sites, a dozen logins, a dozen ways to search
- 02 An office portal that is down, or only open between nine and four
- 03 A record that exists but is indexed under a name spelled differently
- 04 Findings copied into a spreadsheet so they can be read in one place
- 05 A source nobody checked, because nobody agreed whose job it was
- 06 A conclusion that has to be re-derived a month later from scratch
What goes into XtractSol record research
Each agent is built around the record types and jurisdictions you work in, and the way your team reviews results. Start with one kind of research or cover several.
The lookups stop being manual
Records pulled from the sources your research depends on, including recorders, tax authorities and court systems where they are available electronically.
A history you can read at a glance
Transfers, ownership and property detail gathered into an ordered picture instead of a folder of separate documents.
Nothing slips past quietly
Liens, judgments and other encumbrances tied to the property or the parties surfaced and flagged for your team to weigh.
Findings, not a stack of scans
An organised account of what the records show, laid out clearly, with the source sitting behind every point rather than in a separate folder.
Verify in a look, defend it later
Every finding links back to the record it came from. In work where accuracy is a real liability, that is what makes results usable.
Learn about a change when it happens
Where a source supports it, the agent keeps watching and surfaces new filings, rather than waiting for the next time somebody looks.
Where we looked, and where we could not
Most research tools show you what they found. The more useful question, and the one that decides whether a researcher can rely on the result, is what they did not reach.
So every search comes back with its coverage. Seven of these nine sources returned records automatically. The probate court published an index but not the filings themselves. The municipal lien register is not online at all in this jurisdiction, so it goes on the list as work for a person rather than disappearing.
Your researcher opens this knowing exactly how much of the picture is in front of them. That is a different thing from a summary that simply looks complete.
The agent gathers. Your team concludes.
We remove the hours of digging that sit in front of the analysis, not the analysis itself.
Retrieve
Records pulled from every source that publishes them electronically.
AgentOrganise
Ownership, encumbrances and property detail ordered into one picture.
AgentReport gaps
Sources that returned nothing, or only an index, listed openly.
AgentFlag
Liens, judgments and anything that looks material, surfaced for review.
AgentRead
Your researcher reads the records, not just the summary.
Your teamConclude
What it means, and what it means for this transaction. Always a person.
Your teamA clean summary and a thin search look identical on the page
Public records are not evenly digitised. Some offices publish decades of filings in full, some publish an index and keep the documents behind a counter, and some publish nothing at all. Any tool that presents a tidy result without saying which of those it was dealing with is asking your researcher to assume the best.
That assumption is the risk. So the coverage report is not a footnote on our output, it is part of the output. You see which sources answered, which gave an index only, and which need somebody to physically go and look. During the audit we map your jurisdictions and tell you what is realistically automatable before you commit to anything, rather than after.
A search that missed a source is only dangerous when nobody knew it was missed.
The sources your research already depends on
We build against the offices and databases you actually use, and deliver into the systems your team already works in.
Availability varies considerably by jurisdiction and by office. Some publish full records electronically, some publish an index only, and some remain counter access. We confirm what is workable for your markets during the audit.
Results you can stand behind
- ✓ Every finding links back to the record it came from
- ✓ Coverage reported on every search, including what was unreachable
- ✓ The agent surfaces findings for review and never draws the conclusion
- ✓ Your data is never used to train any model
Live in weeks, with your judgment intact
We learn how your research actually works and where the time goes, then build in stages you can inspect.
Discovery call
The records you research, the jurisdictions you work in, and where the gathering costs you most.
Workflow audit
Your sources and review process mapped against real examples, with the coverage picture stated honestly.
Build and tune
Tuned on your real record types and jurisdictions, so it retrieves accurately and surfaces what your team cares about.
Deploy and refine
Connected to your sources and systems with review built in, then tracked as offices and requirements change.
Which record sources and jurisdictions can you cover?
County recorder, tax and court records, along with property databases where you have access. Coverage genuinely varies by area. Some offices publish everything electronically, some publish an index only, and some still require a person at a counter. We confirm your exact jurisdictions during the workflow audit and tell you plainly which ones can be automated and which cannot.
Does this replace our researchers?
No. The agent gathers and organises, then hands your team a source-linked summary to read. Deciding what a record means, and what it means for this transaction, stays with your people. Most teams use the recovered hours to take on more research with the same headcount.
How do we know the results are complete?
Because the agent reports what it could not reach as clearly as what it found. Every search returns a coverage list showing which sources were retrieved, which returned an index only, and which were unavailable. A gap you can see is manageable. A gap nobody mentioned is the one that causes a problem later.
What happens when a source is down or a record is not online?
It is flagged and routed to your team rather than quietly skipped, with the search retried where the outage looks temporary. Some records are simply not published electronically, and in those cases the agent tells you what still needs a person and where.
Can it monitor records for changes after the search?
Where the source supports it, yes. The agent can keep watching the relevant records and surface new filings as they appear, so you learn about a change when it happens rather than the next time somebody thinks to look.
What does it cost?
A build fee plus a rate per search that scales with volume. You get a firm number after the workflow audit, before you commit to anything, and we will tell you then if your jurisdictions are too thinly covered for it to be worth doing.
Ready to get started?
Book a free discovery call and we will map how agentic AI can fit your workflows.