A valuation vendor bought an AI agent team and kept people on the mark. Copy that split.

A solo GP’s week has a lot of reading in it. You go through a data room, fill in a questionnaire, and pull a founder’s numbers into your model before the quarterly letter. On September 24, a vendor that sells to much larger funds bought a team that automates the data-room and questionnaire parts of that reading. It also said, in writing, what the agents will not do.

What happened

73 Strings, a valuation and portfolio monitoring platform for private markets, acquired Callisto, a Paris-based agentic AI company. Financial terms were not disclosed.

The Business Wire release describes Callisto’s work as automating “due diligence and data room analysis,” the preparation of investment documents, and due diligence questionnaire automation. Pulse 2.0 reports that Callisto’s agents can work with complex Excel files, and that its platform processes information stored across financial databases.

A few details matter for a small fund:

• Timing. Callisto’s technology is to be folded into 73 Intelligence, the company’s platform, “in the coming months.” This is a plan, not a shipped product.
• Agent access. 73 Strings says Callisto’s team will help turn its valuation, extraction and monitoring platforms into ones AI agents can use directly, through the Model Context Protocol (MCP), so agents can access data and run workflows.
• Who sets the value. The release keeps “a deterministic core valuation engine,” with traceable calculations and human judgement central to valuation decisions. Pulse 2.0 reports that the company does not plan to let AI agents set asset values on their own.
• Scale. 73 Strings says its clients represent $20 trillion in assets under management and that Callisto works with firms managing over $200 billion. Both figures are company-reported.

CEO Yann Magnan said, “Our ambition is simple: to be the infrastructure private capital runs on.”

Why a solo GP should care

You will probably never buy this platform. The design choice is still worth copying, because it comes from a vendor that says its clients include nine of the world’s 10 largest private capital firms (company-reported, via Pulse 2.0).

Its split has three layers. Agents do the reading and assembly. A fixed, repeatable engine does the math. A person makes the decision and owns the number. None of these layers is new. What is new is a vendor putting that line in its acquisition announcement, which suggests its clients expect to be asked who set each mark.

A limited partner (LP) can ask a one-person fund the same question. Unlike a large fund, you cannot point to a valuation committee. You can point to a written split and a file that shows where each number came from.

The prepare, check, decide split

Here is a way to sort your recurring work. Put every step in one of three columns.

Prepare (an agent can do it, with sources attached)

• Index a data room and list what is missing against your standard request list.
• Draft answers to an LP’s due diligence questionnaire from your past answers and fund documents.
• Pull revenue, burn, runway and headcount from founder updates into your tracking sheet.
• Draft the portfolio section of the quarterly letter from those updates.

Check (a fixed rule or a person confirms it before it moves)

• Every figure the agent pulled links back to a page, cell or email.
• Every questionnaire answer matches the current fund documents, not an old version.
• Every change in a company’s mark is explained by a named event, such as a new priced round or a written-down plan.

Decide (only you)

• Whether to invest, follow on or pass.
• The value you report to LPs for each position.
• Anything that goes to an LP or a founder under your name.

The rule of thumb: an agent may fill the Prepare column. Nothing crosses from Check to Decide without a source you can open in one click. If an agent’s output has no source, treat it as a guess.

This is a way to organize work, not valuation or legal guidance. Your fund documents, your auditor and your fund administrator set the actual rules for how marks are made and reported.

A test you can run this week

Pick a deal you closed or passed on in the last year, where you still have the data room and your own memo.

1. Give an agent the data room and your standard request list. Ask it for a gap list and a one-page summary, with a source for every claim.
2. Put its output next to your memo. Count three things: facts it got right, facts it got wrong, and facts it stated with no source.
3. Look at the misses. If they cluster in one place, such as cap tables, side letters or spreadsheet tabs, that step stays with you for now.

It uses a deal whose facts you already know, so a wrong answer is easy to spot and changes nothing. Keep confidentiality terms in mind before you upload another company’s documents to any tool.

What to do this week

• Write your prepare, check, decide list on one page. Include every recurring task, not just diligence.
• Run the back-test above on one past deal.
• Add one sentence to your valuation notes saying who sets each mark and what evidence supports it.
• If you use an AI tool for LP questionnaires, check that it answers from your current documents.

If you want a second pair of hands drawing that line for your own fund, a five-hour consult block is one way to map your week into those three columns and choose where a first agent fits.