Open finance skill
Recurring subscription review
Which software and service charges are recurring, overlapping, or quietly increasing?
Detect recurring charges, renewal patterns, price increases, duplicate tools, and subscriptions whose owner or usage is unclear.
Inputs
- ✓Transaction history
- ✓Normalized vendors
- ✓Review period
Outputs
- ✓Recurring-charge inventory
- ✓Annualized spend
- ✓Cancellation-review queue
Checks performed
- ✓Cadence similarity
- ✓Price movement
- ✓Possible tool overlap
Guided synthetic example
See the check from input to decision
Several software charges recur monthly, including two tools with overlapping use cases.
This is the operating model we use at Level. The percentages are estimated shares of the work in a typical review. Actual effort varies with data quality, complexity, and the issue found.
Start with the source records
About 15% of work| Vendor | Monthly charge | First seen | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Example CRM | $1,250 | Jan | Sales |
| Sample Outreach | $790 | Mar | Unknown |
| Demo Scheduler | $240 | Feb | Sales |
Run the deterministic check
About 20% of workCluster normalized payees by cadence and similar amount, then annualize only charges supported by a recurring pattern.
Surface the flagged result
About 10% of workNeeds review
$2,280 of monthly software spend annualizes to $27,360, with $9,480 tied to a tool whose owner is unknown.
Use recorded finance judgment to analyze possible reasons
About 25% of workAt Level, we record the review logic, known explanations, and questions our finance professionals use in this situation. AI applies that documented human judgment to organize the most plausible reasons, without pretending it knows which reason is true.
Possible reasons to investigate
An unknown owner can indicate waste, but the tool may support a critical integration or contracted workflow that transaction data cannot reveal.
Make the final human judgment
About 20% of workA Level finance professional validates the source evidence, challenges the AI-assisted analysis, and decides which explanation is supported.
Make the operating decision
About 10% of workConfirm ownership, usage, renewal date, and dependency before deciding to keep, consolidate, renegotiate, or cancel.
Use this system
Start with the example, then inspect the structure
- Download the invented input and expected output.
- Replace one field at a time with a safe test value.
- Compare the result with the expected structure.
- Have a finance professional review every exception before acting.
MCP preview
run_synthetic_example {"slug":"recurring-subscription-review"}Human review is part of the system
This check organizes evidence and surfaces exceptions. A person with finance domain expertise still needs to interpret the result, validate the source records, and discuss the operating decision.
Open source does not mean open client data. We publish reusable finance tools, checks, templates, and playbooks. Client records, workpapers, credentials, communications, and private configurations remain confidential.