Article 73 of the EU AI Act says providers must report serious incidents. The word "serious" does a lot of work there — and most teams only learn what it meant after they've already missed a window they didn't know was open.
I built SeriousKit because the report is easier to write when you're calm, not when a regulator is already asking why it's late.
30-second takeaway
- "Serious" is defined, not vibes — which means an incident either qualifies or it doesn't.
- The report is a structure, not a confession. Drafting it early de-risks the panic version.
- Most teams have no template until they need one at 2am.
The window you don't see closing
An incident happens — a model output caused harm, a system went down in a high-risk context, a user was affected in a way the Act cares about. The clock starts, and nobody on the team has a draft, a definition they've agreed on, or a clear sense of whether this one counts. By the time they decide it does, the easy version of the report is gone.
A serious-incident draft isn't paperwork for its own sake. It's the artifact that turns "we think this might be reportable" into "here is what happened and what we did."
What the tool does
You describe the event. It drafts the incident report against Article 73's expectations — what to include, what counts as serious, what the timeline should capture. The output is a draft your incident team can edit, not a substitute for owning the response.
SeriousKit runs in the browser, no account, no key. Describe the event and get a report draft.
FAQ
What is SeriousKit?
A tool that drafts a serious-incident report aligned with Article 73 of the EU AI Act from a described event. No account, no key.
Does drafting mean I've reported?
No. It produces the draft; the actual report goes through your own process. This just removes the blank-page problem.
Is this legal advice?
No. Decision-support for drafting, not a legal interpretation of your duty.
Author's Process
This product was built with AI coding tools. The discipline was keeping it a draft, not a verdict — the team still owns the call.
Top comments (0)