Vendors / Adjacent encroachers — ordering, middleware & back-office
Nash
Delivery orchestration middleware — one API over 80+ courier providers plus your own fleet, with autodispatch strategies and status webhooks. Not a POS and not a payment acceptor; it does hold a grocery/retail pick-and-pack product catalog with per-store price, but publishes no menu, modifier or ordering-storefront model of any kind.
scored live legacy rubric
- Claims in scope
- 255
- Scored
- 36
- Assessed
- 34
- Unknown
- 221
- Not applicable
- 59
- Values challenged
- 34
unknown, never as no.Identity
- Owner
- Nash Technologies (privately held; usenash.com now redirects to nash.ai)
- Who it is for
- Businesses orchestrating deliveries across multiple third-party courier fleets plus their own drivers — grocery, quick commerce, retail BOPIS, pharmacy, restaurants; named logos skew enterprise (Walmart, 7-Eleven, Ahold Delhaize, Coles)
- Site
- https://www.nash.ai/
Pricing
transparency: quote-only · unit: Quote only (unit not disclosed; category norm is per-delivery or SaaS + per-delivery) · processor lock-in: no
- Software
- No pricing published anywhere on the site or docs; enterprise quote only. The 17-document /legal set defers every fee to the Order Form, and www.nash.ai/pricing 301s.
Capabilities
Every claim is binary and checkable. Grades: A primary documentation · B product documentation · C pricing or feature page · D marketing claim · E third-party reporting · F inference with no source. A yes on a differentiator claim requires A or B.
Menu, modifiers & pricing engine
Payments & money movement
The POS operates with third-party payment processors of the merchant's choosing (documented list of supported processors/gateways) rather than requiring the vendor's in-house processing. differentiator
payments-processor-choice
Not scored by this record.
Vendor publishes card-processing pricing publicly (a specific flat rate or interchange-plus markup) rather than quote-only. differentiator
payments-published-rates
Not scored by this record.
Native dual-pricing / cash-discount mode stores two prices per item and prints both cash and card totals on the guest check and receipt. differentiator
payments-dual-pricing
Not scored by this record.
Surcharging engine automatically excludes debit and prepaid cards via BIN/product-code detection, enforces the network percentage cap, and can be enabled or disabled per location. differentiator
payments-surcharge-guardrails
Not scored by this record.
All first-party payment terminals accept EMV chip and NFC contactless including Apple Pay and Google Pay.
payments-emv-nfc
The only payment objects among the 429 documented component schemas are PickupPayment and PickupPaymentBarcode, and they describe the COURIER paying the merchant at pickup by presenting a barcode or a provider-issued card; there is no card-acceptance, terminal, wallet or tender schema anywhere in Nash's published OpenAPI 3.1.0 manifest (149 paths, 187 operations, 429 component schemas). Corroborated by www.nash.ai/legal/payment-terms, which scopes every money movement on the platform to Nash charging the merchant's own card, debit or ACH through Stripe, and by a vocabulary control returning zero in BOTH stripped text and raw bytes across all 477 corpus documents for EMV, NFC, contactless, Apple Pay, Google Pay, tap to pay and card reader ('terminal' occurs 60 times and always means a terminal delivery STATUS; the single 'chip card' hit is a CSS comment). The identical file is also served at www.nash.ai/openapi.json, but canonicalised the two are byte-identical (847,754 chars): one build artifact on two hosts, so their agreement corroborates nothing and is not relied on here. Open: the spec bounds the API, not the Portal, and Nash nowhere states in words that it sells no payment terminal. https://docs.usenash.com/api-reference/openapi.json · retrieved 2026-09-06 adversarially verified
Accepts contactless payments directly on a phone (Tap to Pay on iPhone and/or Android tap-to-pay) with no separate card reader. differentiator
payments-softpos-tap-to-pay
Not scored by this record.
Vendor ships a handheld that takes EMV/NFC payment at the table, including tip prompt and check splitting, without carrying the card away.
payments-pay-at-table
Not scored by this record.
Guest can scan a QR code on the printed check or table tent to view and pay the check from their own phone, with the payment closing the check in the POS automatically. differentiator
payments-qr-guest-pay
Not scored by this record.
Supports both pre-auth-then-tip-adjust and on-device tip prompt flows, with a documented batch/adjust window and a manager screen for unadjusted tips.
payments-tip-adjust
Not scored by this record.
Configurable tip pooling and distribution rules (by hours worked, sales, role percentage, or points) that produce a per-employee tip allocation exportable to payroll. differentiator
payments-tip-pooling
Not scored by this record.
Card payments can be captured while the internet is down via store-and-forward, with configurable per-transaction and cumulative offline limits. differentiator
payments-offline-store-and-forward
Not scored by this record.
Vendor publicly documents who bears the loss when a stored offline transaction declines on reconnect, and surfaces a post-reconnect report of failed offline payments. differentiator
payments-offline-decline-liability
Not scored by this record.
First-party gift cards with real-time balance tracking, redeemable across every location in the group and through the online-ordering channel.
payments-gift-cards
Nash's own Payment Terms enumerate what payment means on the Nash platform -- ACH and card authorization, Stripe processing, fees, interest and disputes, all of it Nash billing the merchant -- with no consumer tender and no stored-value instrument. On the API side, none of the 429 documented component schemas or 187 operations is a gift-card, stored-value or balance object, and the only cents-denominated amounts are delivery fee, order value and tip. Vocabulary control: 'gift card', 'gift cards', 'giftcard', 'gift_card' and 'stored value' are 0 documents / 0 hits in BOTH stripped text and raw bytes across all 477 documents. Open: the docs page set is a floor, not a census -- an unlisted live page, api-reference/route/assign-route-by-external-identifier, sits outside both the sitemap and llms.txt -- and www.nash.ai/gift-cards returns the site's generic 404 body, which bounds that slug and no topic. https://www.nash.ai/legal/payment-terms · retrieved 2026-09-06 adversarially verified
House/on-account tabs with per-account credit limits, running balance, and periodic statement or invoice generation.
payments-house-accounts
Not scored by this record.
A single check can be settled with multiple tenders and split by seat, by item, by even shares, or by arbitrary amount, with no hard cap below eight ways.
payments-split-tender
Not scored by this record.
Voids, refunds, discounts, and no-sales require role-based authorization (manager PIN or approval) and write to an immutable audit log identifying the approver.
payments-refund-void-controls
Nash's only refund object is RefundRequestResponse, and its DOCUMENTED property list is the ceiling for that object: id, createdAt, resolutionDate, jobId, taskId, organizationId, incidentSubtype, incidentNotes, status, plus the amount, currency and proof fields -- twenty properties carrying approval STATES but no approver, approvedBy or role field, so the resolved record does not identify who approved it. Documented, not provable: 423 of the 429 schemas omit additionalProperties, which under JSON Schema permits undocumented extra properties, though an undocumented field cannot be cited as a capability either. It is also a merchant-to-courier refund of delivery fee, order value and tip, not a POS tender refund. Voids, discounts and no-sales have no representation at all: 'void/voids/voided' resolves to 13 hits in 10 documents, every one either legal 'null and void' or brand copy about shouting into the void, and 'no-sale', 'manager PIN' and 'approver' are 0/0 in text and raw. docs.usenash.com/reference/roles-and-access is Nash's RBAC reference and none of its 22 assignable features is a tender operation -- but that list is a FLOOR for permissions, since the same page names an action-level permission, delete.proof-of-delivery, that is not among the 22 -- and nash-agent/guardrails puts 'refunding' behind per-user confirmation of an agent action, which is not role-based authorization and names no approver-identifying log. https://docs.usenash.com/api-reference/openapi.json · retrieved 2026-09-06 adversarially verified
In-product dispute/chargeback dashboard that lists open disputes and allows evidence submission assembled from the POS transaction record. differentiator
payments-chargeback-tooling
Not scored by this record.
Tokenized card-on-file for a guest profile, reusable across online ordering, phone orders, and in-store, with no PAN stored by the merchant. differentiator
payments-card-on-file
Not scored by this record.
Vendor publishes its deposit schedule and offers a next-day or same-day/instant funding option. differentiator
payments-payout-timing
Not scored by this record.
A single account can route settlement funds to different bank accounts per location or legal entity (separate MIDs or split settlement) under unified reporting. differentiator
payments-multi-entity-routing
Not scored by this record.
Vendor provides point-to-point encryption and a current PCI DSS 4.x Attestation of Compliance / P2PE listing available to merchants on request.
payments-p2pe-pci4
Not scored by this record.
Delivery, dispatch & third-party channels
Product includes a native in-house driver module: drivers are first-class entities with clock-in/out, assignment state (in-store / on-run / returning), and per-driver run history reportable from the POS itself (not via a third-party add-on).
delivery-driver-roster
Drivers are first-class records in the Nash Portal: 'Add New Driver' takes First/Last Name, Phone Number, optional Vehicle (Car/SUV/Bike/Motorbike, brand, model, year, colour, plate) and one or more store Locations, 'which determines which locations the driver can fulfill orders for'; routes can be assigned 'to a provider, driver group, courier, or vehicle'. The shortfalls are named and material: state is a two-way Availability toggle, not clock-in/out with timestamps, and no in-store / on-run / returning assignment state is documented; per-driver history is driver-facing only - drivers 'see assigned deliveries, set availability, and view history' in the web Driver App, with no operator-side per-driver run report documented; and the module is not self-serve - 'Internal fleets are created on the backend by Nash' and 'The Drivers tab appears only for organizations on Nash Lite TMS.' https://docs.usenash.com/guides/internal-fleet-setup · retrieved 2026-08-09
Provides a dedicated dispatch/expo screen showing undispatched orders, driver availability, and elapsed time per order, with multi-order run batching (assigning 2+ orders to one driver as a single run).
delivery-dispatch-board
Ops console plus autodispatch with configurable dispatch strategies and manual quote selection; multi-order run batching not documented publicly. https://docs.usenash.com/home · retrieved 2026-08-01
Dispatch includes a live map view with geocoded stops and system-generated route sequencing (turn order optimization) for a multi-stop run, not just a static address list. differentiator
delivery-route-map
Not scored by this record.
Captures live driver GPS position from a driver-facing mobile app and surfaces it back to the dispatch screen. differentiator
delivery-driver-tracking
Not scored by this record.
Delivery areas can be defined as arbitrary map polygons or by drive-time isochrones, not solely as a radius or a ZIP/postcode list. differentiator
delivery-zones-polygon
Not scored by this record.
Each delivery zone carries its own independently configurable delivery fee, order minimum, and quoted promise time, applied automatically from the validated customer address.
delivery-zone-pricing
The published OpenAPI schema for POST /v1/zones (CreateZoneInputSerializer) enumerates every field a zone accepts: externalId, name, coverageAreaId, polygon, storeLocationIds, storeLocationAssociations, tags, zoneMetadata. No delivery fee, order minimum or promise-time field exists, and the reference page's own list agrees - a zone carries 'a name and an optional external ID', 'store location associations', 'a coverage area' and 'free-form tags and metadata'. The ZoneRestriction object layered on top is only id, externalId, name, isActive and free-form restrictionMetadata. Promise time is not a zone attribute either: prepTimeMinutes sits on the store location, not the zone. Delivery price is quoted per order by providers - 'Request fresh price quotes from delivery providers for an existing order' - not configured per zone. Zones do resolve automatically from an address via GET /v1/zones/coverage, but they carry no commercial terms. https://docs.usenash.com/api-reference/zones/create-a-zone · retrieved 2026-08-09
Address entry is validated/geocoded against a mapping service at order time and rejects or flags out-of-zone addresses before the order is accepted.
delivery-address-validation
Not scored by this record.
Tracks per-delivery driver compensation inputs — mileage or distance driven per run, per-delivery flat reimbursement, and driver-retained tips — and exports them to payroll as separate reimbursement vs. wage lines. differentiator
delivery-driver-comp
Not scored by this record.
Provides a driver cash bank / settle-up flow that reconciles cash collected, orders assigned, and tips owed at end of shift, producing a per-driver over/short figure.
delivery-cash-reconcile
Not scored by this record.
Can hand a first-party order to an on-demand courier marketplace (DoorDash Drive, Uber Direct, Nash, Relay or equivalent) natively from the POS, with the courier quote and status returning into the order record.
delivery-daas-dispatch
Not scored by this record.
Supports hybrid dispatch: rules that automatically overflow an order to a DaaS courier when no in-house driver is available, out of zone, or past a wait threshold. differentiator
delivery-daas-fallback
Not scored by this record.
Offers direct, first-party certified API integrations with DoorDash, Uber Eats, and Grubhub marketplaces (vendor-owned, not solely resold through Otter/Deliverect/Chowly/ItsaCheckmate middleware). differentiator
delivery-3p-direct-integration
Not scored by this record.
Third-party marketplace orders inject automatically into the POS as normal tickets that fire to KDS/printers without tablet re-keying or manual accept.
delivery-3p-injection
Not scored by this record.
Marking an item or modifier 86'd in the POS pushes item-level out-of-stock status to connected third-party channels in near real time, and restores it on availability (DoorDash requires item and item-option 86ing of new POS partners).
delivery-86-sync
Not scored by this record.
Store can be paused/deactivated on each connected third-party marketplace from inside the POS with a timed auto-reactivation, rather than only from each marketplace's own tablet or portal.
delivery-store-pause
Not scored by this record.
Produces a third-party reconciliation report matching marketplace payout deposits to POS-recorded 3P sales, itemizing commission, marketing fees, refunds/adjustments, and identifying missing or unpaid orders. differentiator
delivery-3p-reconciliation
Not scored by this record.
Vendor exposes integration health to the operator — failed/rejected order injections, connection status per channel, and alerts on failure — rather than failing silently. differentiator
delivery-injection-error-visibility
Not scored by this record.
Guests receive a branded order status / driver tracking page or SMS link on the restaurant's own domain for first-party delivery orders, driven by real order and driver state.
delivery-tracking-page
Not scored by this record.
Quoted delivery promise times adjust dynamically from current kitchen load, driver availability, and zone drive time, rather than a fixed per-store constant. differentiator
delivery-promise-time
Not scored by this record.
Vendor documents explicit offline behavior for delivery: whether cash delivery orders, driver assignment, and driver settlement continue during an internet outage.
delivery-offline-behavior
Not scored by this record.
Digital ordering & guest-facing channels
Vendor ships a first-party, commission-free web ordering site on the restaurant's own branding/domain that writes orders directly into the POS with no per-order marketplace commission.
digital-first-party-web
Nash names 'Agentic Commerce' as one of the Layer 01 Interfaces of its own platform and defines it as a 'Conversational storefront. End consumers browse and buy in natural language rather than clicking through a catalog, and AI agents can complete purchases on their behalf' (www.nash.ai/glossary/agentic-commerce; the block recirculates across 7 glossary pages, so it is one occurrence, not seven). The Layer taxonomy is Nash's own platform architecture: 26 of 122 glossary pages carry a Layer designation, while industry terms such as POS are labelled 'Industries' instead. Nothing else exists behind it: www.nash.ai/agentic-commerce returns the site's 404 body at 27,769 b, byte-identical to a fabricated control slug fetched in the same minute; docs.usenash.com uses 'storefront' twice and both times it is the CALLER's storefront; and the published OpenAPI spec has zero cart, checkout or storefront operation. Counter-evidence, which is why this is unresolved rather than partial: the same page's 'Where this fits' sentence enumerates Layer 01 as 'Operations Portal, Fleet App, customer tracking surfaces, the public API, MCP and A2A endpoints', omitting the storefront, and glossary/white-label scopes Nash's branded surfaces to 'the customer's tracking page, notifications, and driver app'. So Nash both announces and omits a consumer purchase surface, and this project's precedent is that an announced-but-undocumented product forbids a `no` (sambapos/Extra360). The document that would settle it is a product page, a docs page or an API operation for Agentic Commerce; Nash publishes none, and the 168-page docs nav is a floor rather than a census. || 320th: NEW SURFACE, still unresolved. help.usenash.com (Nash's Pylon KB, production, robots whitelists ClaudeBot; 239 articles, sitemap ids == href fixpoint ids) frames every ordering surface as the merchant's own or a third party's: 'Your customers place orders on a storefront or ordering platform you already run. Once that platform is connected to Nash, each qualifying order becomes a Nash order automatically' and 'Two platforms have a guided, in-portal setup today: Shopify ... Toast' (/articles/3967839655-online-ordering-platforms-overview); 'If you sell through Shopify, Toast, or Wix, those connections are set up with Nash'; Nash widgets are read-only: 'A widget displays a delivery — it never performs one' (/articles/4917947009-how-widgets-work). Tokenised controls over all 239 KB bodies: 'agentic' 0; 'add to cart' 0; 'storefront' only as the merchant's Shopify storefront. This leans toward no but is not published as `no`: the KB describes what exists rather than excluding a first-party store, and the www.nash.ai Agentic Commerce 'conversational storefront' item (standing rationale) is unrefuted. crt.sh also lists store.sandbox.usenash.com ('Nash Store': a SANDBOX host, Auth0 login-gated Next.js shell, not entered) and widgets-demo.usenash.com (widget demo, no ordering). A `no` needs Nash to state it provides no ordering site, or the Agentic Commerce item to be withdrawn. Retrieved 2026-09-16. || 329th: 329th: www.nash.ai has been REBUILT since the 320th (sitemap now 300 URLs vs the 122 glossary pages the standing rationale was bound to: 123 glossary, 62 blog, 32 events, 30 release notes, 17 legal, plus 21 product/solution pages). All 80 non-blog/glossary/event pages fetched at 200 and stripped. The rebuild adds no ordering surface and strengthens the merchant-owns-the-store reading: /restaurants onboarding says "Plugs into your POS, online ordering, catering portal, and provider contracts" and "When any of those runs short, the slot disappears from the storefront"; /platforms says "Each storefront runs its own operation. The integration doesn't know the difference ... Every storefront calls the same network". Nash's own DEVELOPER docs frame checkout the same way: docs.usenash.com/llms.txt (44,150 b, 253 listed pages) titles a guide "Sample checkout workflow: A step-by-step workflow for embedding Nash delivery quotes, dispatch, and tracking into your checkout" and "API tutorial: an example checkout workflow with Nom Nom Goods ... through an example app checkout workflow"; the only catalogue Nash holds is fulfilment-side -- "The store catalog combines a master product catalog and per-store inventory to power item-level fulfillment ... how Pick and Pack works". Controls over llms.txt: storefront 0, cart 0, agentic 0, audit 0; 'checkout' 5 hits, every one the integrator's checkout. STILL UNKNOWN because the Agentic Commerce announcement is unretracted and unimplemented, exactly as in the standing rationale: www.nash.ai/glossary/agentic-commerce is live and byte-for-byte the same text ("Conversational storefront. End consumers browse and buy in natural language ...", Layer 01 Interfaces, whose 'Where this fits' list again omits a storefront), the term still rides the /one-platform Layer-01 marquee, and www.nash.ai/agentic-commerce is still a 404 -- 27,744 bytes, 5,353 stripped, BYTE-IDENTICAL to a nonsense control /glossary/zzz-not-a-real-term-329 fetched in the same minute. help.usenash.com is unchanged: its sitemap now lists 373 URLs but that is 239 articles + collections + an /es/ mirror, and the 239 article ids are IDENTICAL to the 320th's set (0 added, 0 removed), so no new KB evidence exists. Retrieved 2026-09-18. adversarially verified
Vendor offers a branded native iOS and Android ordering app (published under the restaurant's own brand in the App Store/Play Store), not only a mobile web page or a shared multi-restaurant marketplace app. differentiator
digital-native-app
Not scored by this record.
Guests can create an account with saved addresses, saved (tokenized) payment methods, and one-tap reorder of a previous order across first-party channels.
digital-account-saved-payment
Nash's own US merchant terms state that it processes no payments for services; its Stripe relationship exists solely to bill the merchant for Nash fees ('Payment Method' throughout /legal/payment-terms and /legal/platform-agreement is the merchant's own card, debit or ACH, never a guest's). Scope, stated honestly: this sentence appears only in the three Square Marketplace merchant terms, and the Australian and Canadian editions carry the broader wording 'for any Customer services or Goods'; the US edition is cited because this record is US-primary. The claim's three ingredients are separately absent from Nash's whole published surface: 'tokenize/tokenised/tokenized' is 0 documents / 0 hits in BOTH stripped text and raw bytes across all 477 corpus documents, as are 'Apple Pay' and 'Google Pay'; the 7 'reorder' hits are drag-to-reorder UI controls and blog prose, never a consumer one-tap reorder; and the published spec has no guest, customer or profile entity, its only user endpoints being organization staff. The single consumer surface Nash publishes, the hosted tracking page, is addressed by an unauthenticated id in the URL, so there is no guest login. https://www.nash.ai/legal/square-merchant-terms · retrieved 2026-09-06 adversarially verified
Digital checkout presents configurable or algorithmic upsell/cross-sell suggestions (rules-based add-ons or personalized recommendations from order history), with attach-rate reporting on those suggestions. differentiator
digital-upsell-engine
Not scored by this record.
Supports future/scheduled orders with per-daypart throttling — capacity limits on orders or items per time slot that automatically close slots when the kitchen is saturated.
digital-scheduled-pacing
Not scored by this record.
Single digital ordering flow supports pickup, curbside (with arrival check-in), dine-in/QR table ordering, and delivery, with mode-specific fees and prep timing.
digital-fulfillment-modes
Not scored by this record.
Supports guest-facing QR scan-to-order and/or scan-to-pay at the table that opens or attaches to the existing POS check, including splitting and tipping.
digital-qr-table
Not scored by this record.
Vendor ships a self-order kiosk running the same menu and modifier logic as the POS, with accessibility-compliant UI and unattended EMV payment. differentiator
digital-kiosk
Not scored by this record.
Supports group ordering: a shareable link where multiple participants add their own items to one order under a per-person or total spend cap, with split or single payment.
digital-group-ordering
Not scored by this record.
Offers a distinct catering ordering flow with separate catering menu/minimums, lead-time rules, quotes or proposals, deposits, and invoice/house-account or ACH payment terms. differentiator
digital-catering-portal
Not scored by this record.
Vendor offers AI voice phone ordering (native or a named certified partner) that answers inbound calls and injects the completed order into the POS without staff transcription. differentiator
digital-voice-ai-phone
Not scored by this record.
Supports AI voice ordering at the drive-thru lane, integrated with the POS menu/modifiers and with escalation-to-human handoff.
digital-drivethru-ai
Not scored by this record.
Supports conversational SMS or chat ordering/reordering (text-to-order or text-a-link) that lands in the POS.
digital-sms-ordering
Not scored by this record.
Supports Order with Google — the restaurant's direct ordering link is provisioned to the Google Business Profile as an ordering option (ideally set as 'Preferred by Business'), rather than leaving marketplace links as the only choice. differentiator
digital-google-order
Not scored by this record.
Supports Apple Business Connect ordering placement — an 'Order Food' custom action on the Apple Maps place card pointing at the vendor's first-party ordering flow.
digital-apple-business-connect
Not scored by this record.
Loyalty accrual and redemption work inside the first-party digital ordering flow using the same guest identity as in-store, not as a separate post-purchase enrollment.
digital-loyalty-attach
Not scored by this record.
Supports guest subscription / membership programs (recurring billing for a delivery-fee waiver, a per-period item entitlement, or a paid loyalty tier) managed in the platform.
digital-subscriptions
Not scored by this record.
Discounts, coupon codes, and loyalty offers are defined once and honored identically across POS, kiosk, and first-party digital channels, with channel eligibility controls.
digital-promo-parity
Not scored by this record.
Vendor documents that the operator owns and can export first-party guest records (email, phone, consented marketing status, order history) in bulk, without a fee or vendor approval. differentiator
digital-guest-data-ownership
Not scored by this record.
Digital checkout uses vendor-hosted fields or a hosted payment page so card data never touches the restaurant's page, with the vendor publishing PCI DSS 4.0 compliance (including the client-side script-integrity requirements effective March 2025) and supporting 3DS.
digital-checkout-pci-sca
Not scored by this record.
Digital channels support the same service-fee / dual-pricing / card-surcharge configuration as the POS, with the required guest-facing disclosure and correct handling of jurisdictions and card brands where surcharging is prohibited. differentiator
digital-surcharge-transparency
Not scored by this record.
Guest data, loyalty & marketing
Maintains a single guest profile that automatically merges transactions from in-store POS, first-party web/app ordering, and kiosk under one identity (phone or email match), with documented dedup/merge behavior.
guest-loyalty-unified-profile
Across the 429 documented component schemas there is no Customer, Guest, Consumer or Profile entity of any kind: 'customer' survives in exactly two places, the costSplitCustomerCents field and this RecipientType enum, where a customer is a MESSAGE RECIPIENT on one delivery rather than a durable identity. The only consumer identifiers in the whole API are the per-delivery dropoffPhoneNumber and dropoffEmail fields, and there is no merge, dedup or identity-resolution operation among the 187 operations. Vocabulary control across all 477 documents in text and raw: 'guest profile', 'dedup' and 'segmentation' are 0/0. Open: this bounds the documented API, not the Portal, and Nash publishes no Portal screen inventory that would settle whether an unexposed guest record exists. https://docs.usenash.com/api-reference/openapi.json · retrieved 2026-09-06 adversarially verified
Orders arriving from third-party marketplaces (DoorDash, Uber Eats, Grubhub) attach to a native guest profile with usable guest identity rather than landing as anonymous tickets. differentiator
guest-loyalty-thirdparty-identity-attach
Not scored by this record.
Supports at least two of points-per-dollar, visit/punch-count, and spend-tier accrual as configuration, without custom development or a bolt-on loyalty vendor.
guest-loyalty-accrual-models
Nash's own copy places the loyalty program on the merchant's side of the boundary -- something you connect Nash's delivery to, not something Nash runs. The absence of any accrual mechanism is bounded on the API side by the published spec: none of the 429 documented component schemas or 187 operations mentions loyalty, points, rewards, tiers, punches or redemption ('membership' is organization membership under the Users tag). Vocabulary controls across all 477 documents in text AND raw: 'points per', 'punch card' and 'accrual' are 0/0; 'loyalt' hits 27 documents, all marketing prose using loyalty as an outcome word, and ZERO of the 170 docs.usenash.com documents including the spec. www.nash.ai/loyalty-program returns the site's generic 404 body, identical to a fabricated control slug, which bounds that slug only and is not relied on. https://www.nash.ai/blog/how-to-future-proof-a-profitable-delightful-grocery-delivery-experience · retrieved 2026-09-06 adversarially verified
Supports status tiers with automatic promotion and demotion driven by rolling-window spend or visit counts. differentiator
guest-loyalty-tiers
Not scored by this record.
Documents explicitly what loyalty lookup, accrual, and redemption do when the POS loses connectivity (queue-and-reconcile vs blocked). differentiator
guest-loyalty-offline-behavior
Not scored by this record.
Offer/discount engine exposes explicit stacking and precedence rules (exclusive vs combinable, order of application) as configuration. differentiator
guest-loyalty-offer-stacking-rules
Not scored by this record.
Offers can be issued to a dynamically defined audience (rules over recency, frequency, spend, or items purchased) rather than only broadcast to the whole list. differentiator
guest-loyalty-targeted-offers
Not scored by this record.
Automatically computes recency/frequency/monetary or equivalent lifecycle segments (new, regular, at-risk, lapsed, VIP) without the operator building the queries. differentiator
guest-loyalty-rfm-segmentation
Not scored by this record.
Ships triggered lifecycle automations (birthday, first-visit thank-you, lapsed win-back) as configurable always-on campaigns rather than one-off manual sends.
guest-loyalty-lifecycle-automation
Nash publishes a closed enumeration of what its automations can be about: TriggerEntityType is route, delivery, task, order, activity, unknown -- a trigger cannot be scoped to a guest, because no guest entity exists. Alongside it NotificationTriggerSlug is a closed 52-value enum naming every trigger Nash documents (delivery_incident_report, dropoff_delayed, stuck_status, refund_request, customer_not_home and so on) and all 52 are delivery, route, driver or order operational events; there is no birthday, anniversary, first-visit, lapsed or win-back slug. Vocabulary control across all 477 documents, text and raw: 'win-back' and 'winback' are 0/0, and the 2 'birthday' hits are one blog post about buying a gift. Nash does ship generic Workflows with a cron trigger, so an operator could build a scheduled send -- but the claim requires the three lifecycle campaigns shipped as configurable always-on automations, and Nash's documented catalog contains none of them. https://docs.usenash.com/api-reference/openapi.json · retrieved 2026-09-06 adversarially verified
Sends both email and SMS campaigns natively from the platform, not solely by handing the list to a third-party ESP. differentiator
guest-loyalty-native-email-sms
Not scored by this record.
Captures per-channel marketing consent with timestamp and source of consent, and honors revocation received by any reasonable means (not just the STOP keyword) across all channels.
guest-loyalty-consent-management
Not scored by this record.
Handles or explicitly documents A2P 10DLC brand and campaign registration required for the operator to send SMS through the platform.
guest-loyalty-10dlc-registration
Not scored by this record.
Reports redemption and incremental sales attributable to a specific campaign or offer, tying redeemed offers to actual check totals. differentiator
guest-loyalty-campaign-attribution
Not scored by this record.
Provides self-serve export of the full guest list and transaction history, including contact PII, via CSV or API, without a vendor fee or support ticket. differentiator
guest-loyalty-data-export-portability
Not scored by this record.
Exposes a documented outbound guest and order event API or webhook stream that a CDP or marketing platform can subscribe to (e.g. Olo, Punchh, Bridg, Klaviyo). differentiator
guest-loyalty-cdp-event-api
Not scored by this record.
Triggers post-transaction feedback requests and routes responses by score, sending low scores to private service recovery and high scores toward public review sites. differentiator
guest-loyalty-review-capture-routing
Not scored by this record.
Includes a native referral mechanic with per-guest codes or links, attribution of the referred guest's first order, and two-sided rewards.
guest-loyalty-referral-program
Not scored by this record.
Issues an Apple Wallet or Google Wallet loyalty pass with push-updatable balance, as an alternative to requiring a branded app download. differentiator
guest-loyalty-wallet-pass
Not scored by this record.
Provides admin tooling to fulfill guest data access and deletion requests (CCPA/CPRA-style) including deletion propagation to loyalty and marketing records.
guest-loyalty-privacy-rights-tooling
Not scored by this record.
Enforces loyalty fraud controls such as redemption velocity limits, manager approval on manual point adjustments, and flagging of employee self-redemption, with an audit log.
guest-loyalty-redemption-fraud-controls
Not scored by this record.
Vendor documents AI/ML-generated recommendations for offer content, target audience, or send timing (claim-level; verify it is a shipped product feature, not a roadmap statement). differentiator
guest-loyalty-ai-offer-recommendation
Not scored by this record.
Offers native stored-value/gift card balances tied to the same guest profile and redeemable across all locations of the brand.
guest-loyalty-stored-value-gift
Not scored by this record.
Labor & workforce
Employees clock in and out at the POS terminal using a PIN, badge, or card, with no separate time-clock hardware required.
labor-clock-in-at-pos
This is the Nash Portal's own feature census: access is granted by feature, and the quoted list is every feature a role can be given. There is no timekeeping, labor or payroll feature in it. The one workforce feature, Shifts, is courier shifts -- 'a courier shift with start/end times and an assigned store location', with fields plannedStart, plannedEnd, plannedBreakDuration, courierId and vehicleId, a planned roster for route optimisation rather than a punch -- and guides/internal-fleet-setup gives the Portal driver roster the same shape (Name, Phone Number, Vehicle, Location and an Availability toggle). Nash also publishes no POS terminal at all: www.nash.ai/glossary/pos defines POS as someone else's system and says 'Nash integrates at the POS so a delivery is created the instant the order is rung up.' Vocabulary control across all 477 documents in text and raw: 'clock in', 'clock out', 'time clock', 'timeclock', 'timesheet' and 'punch in' are 0/0, and no clock, punch or payroll field appears in any of the 429 documented schemas. Note the limit of the quoted list: it is a census of FEATURES but a floor for PERMISSIONS, since the same page names an action-level permission, delete.proof-of-delivery, that is not among the 22. https://docs.usenash.com/reference/roles-and-access · retrieved 2026-09-06 adversarially verified
Captures a photo at punch (or performs facial verification) attached to the timecard entry, with a photo-only mode available that stores no biometric template. differentiator
labor-photo-punch-verification
Not scored by this record.
Supports mobile clock-in restricted by geofence or location validation for staff who do not punch at a fixed terminal.
labor-geofenced-mobile-punch
Not scored by this record.
Records time punches while the POS is offline and reconciles them on reconnect without loss or duplicate entries, with the behavior documented. differentiator
labor-offline-time-punch
Not scored by this record.
Permissions are grantable per discrete action (void, comp, discount, refund, drawer open, price change, report access) per role and per location, not limited to fixed cashier/manager/admin tiers.
labor-granular-rbac
Org-scoped API keys plus a Nash-Org-Id header, and the AI agent is described as scoped to org permissions; discrete-action permission grid not documented. https://docs.usenash.com/home · retrieved 2026-08-01
Manager overrides and approvals are attributed to the individual approver and written to an immutable audit trail queryable after the fact.
labor-manager-override-audit
320th MERGE REFUSAL: the Audit Log covers settings-object edits (shifts/zones/windows), not manager overrides or approvals; adjacent feature, immutability unstated. Agent proposal (held unknown at merge): CLAIM: manager overrides and approvals are attributed to the individual approver and written to an immutable audit trail queryable after the fact. VERDICT: partial/B. NEW SURFACE: help.usenash.com, Nash's Pylon knowledge base (production; found via crt.sh %.usenash.com; its robots.txt is a whitelist that explicitly ALLOWS ClaudeBot/Claude-User/Claude-SearchBot and disallows * otherwise). Census: 239 article ids in /sitemap.xml, identical to the 239 ids reached by the href fixpoint from the home page; 16 in-body hrefs return 404 (renamed/removed slugs, not 401/403 gated). EVIDENCE: 'Audit Log records every change to a shift. Both are read surfaces' and 'The Audit Log tab is the running record of who changed what. Each entry shows the date, the user, the object ID, the change type, and the shift it applies to. Filter the list by change type with the All types, Created, and Deleted tabs, or search across users, objects, types, and IDs ... Select an entry to open its Event Details, including the resource, object ID, timestamp, and payload' (help.usenash.com/articles/3342721350-shift-reports-and-activity-log). The same Audit Log tab exists for zones ('Audit Log — a history of changes to zones', /articles/2367185999-zones-overview) and delivery windows ('Audit Log — a record of changes made to delivery windows over time', /articles/8801055116-delivery-windows-overview). So a per-user-attributed, searchable, filterable change trail with payloads is documented. SHORTFALLS: (1) scope is configuration objects (shifts, zones, delivery windows), not a general override/approval log; (2) the one documented dispatch override is only flagged without a named user: 'If someone manually reassigns the delivery, a Manual Reassignment indicator appears' (/articles/5619931938-see-workflows-used-on-a-delivery); the delivery timeline lists status changes, reassignments and custom 'Add Event' entries without stating attribution (/articles/1099117218-track-delivery-progress-on-the-timeline); (3) no approver concept is logged (refund requests are approved by Nash; Nash Agent tool policies 'need your approval before it acts' with no documented approval log); (4) immutability is not stated; (5) 'The Audit Log tab is hidden if your access is scoped to specific locations'. Retrieved 2026-09-16. || 329th: 329th: the one KB article that is ABOUT an override was read for this cell (it was not cited in the 320th proposal) and it still misses the attribution conjunct. help.usenash.com/articles/8564523105 (provider/contract eligibility override): "Overrides are versioned: every save records a commit message so you can see what changed and when" and "A new-version dialog opens showing what changed and a required Commit message field ... To review past versions, use the version history (the clock icon next to the override heading)". So overrides do get a queryable, versioned trail with a mandatory reason -- but the page states only WHAT and WHEN, never WHO, and says nothing about immutability; and the override is an eligibility restriction authored in the portal, not a manager approval at a register ("How an override actually affects quoting and dispatch ... is applied by Nash"). The rebuilt www.nash.ai adds vendor statements at marketing grade only: /experience "Nash provides structured workflows for refund requests, return logistics, and issue resolution, with escalation paths and audit trails" (the accompanying trail, e.g. "14:48 KM refund created / 14:51 ops routed to review / 14:54 JL approved", is an illustrative mock-up, not documentation); /agent shows an approve/deny/tune action queue with "Acknowledged - applied reassignment - logged to audit trail" and /one-platform lists Memory as holding "Every decision, outcome, and override". Controls: 'audit' 0 hits in docs.usenash.com/llms.txt (253 pages), so no audit or event-log API is published; the 239-article KB is unchanged since the 320th (same ids, 0 added). Held unknown, not partial: Nash has no manager-approval-at-a-register concept for the trail to attribute, and no surface states an approver identity or immutability. Retrieved 2026-09-18. adversarially verified
Builds and publishes employee shift schedules inside the same platform that holds the timekeeping data, rather than requiring a third-party scheduling app. differentiator
labor-native-scheduling
Not scored by this record.
Generates recommended staffing levels or labor hours by daypart from the operator's own POS sales history, not just a static template. differentiator
labor-demand-labor-forecast
Not scored by this record.
Displays labor cost as a percentage of sales in real time during service on a manager view or POS, not only in end-of-day or next-morning reports. differentiator
labor-realtime-labor-percent
Not scored by this record.
Warns or blocks at clock-in when an employee is approaching or would cross a configured overtime threshold, before the overtime is incurred. differentiator
labor-overtime-prevention
Not scored by this record.
Configures meal and rest break rules per state or jurisdiction, prompts required break attestation, and flags missed breaks for premium pay. differentiator
labor-break-compliance-by-state
Not scored by this record.
Supports predictive-scheduling ordinances by tracking advance-notice deadlines for published schedules and calculating predictability pay owed for employer-initiated changes.
labor-fair-workweek-support
Not scored by this record.
Enforces minor-labor restrictions (age-based maximum hours, prohibited time windows, school-day limits) at both scheduling and clock-in.
labor-minor-labor-rules
Not scored by this record.
Computes tip pooling and tip-outs automatically per shift from configurable rules (percentage of sales, hours worked, points, or role), rather than requiring a manual spreadsheet.
labor-tip-pooling-rules
Not scored by this record.
Retains a per-shift, per-employee record of tips received, amounts contributed to the pool, and amounts distributed from the pool, exportable for audit.
labor-tip-distribution-audit-trail
Not scored by this record.
Payroll export separates cash from charged qualified tips and carries a Treasury tipped-occupation code, supporting the W-2 Box 12 code TP and Box 14b reporting required for tax year 2026. differentiator
labor-qualified-tips-w2-reporting
Not scored by this record.
Vendor processes payroll itself as a first-party product (tax filing and direct deposit), as opposed to exporting to a third-party payroll provider only. differentiator
labor-native-payroll
Not scored by this record.
Exports timecards, wages, and tips in documented formats or via direct integration for at least two major payroll providers (e.g. Gusto, ADP, Paychex, QuickBooks).
labor-payroll-export-formats
Not scored by this record.
Employees can request shift swaps or claim open shifts in a self-service app, subject to a manager approval workflow that enforces overtime and role eligibility. differentiator
labor-shift-swap-workflow
Not scored by this record.
Provides digital new-hire onboarding that collects W-4 and I-9 documentation and supports E-Verify submission.
labor-digital-onboarding-i9
Not scored by this record.
Reports per-employee sales performance metrics (average check, items or category attachment rate, void and comp rate) by server or cashier. differentiator
labor-server-performance-metrics
Not scored by this record.
Inventory, purchasing & cost control
Supports multi-level recipe/BOM costing where a recipe can contain sub-recipes (prep items) and plate cost recalculates automatically when any component ingredient's cost changes.
inventory-recipe-bom-costing
Nash has a real inventory concept, so this is not a bare zero: reference/store-catalog states that the catalog has exactly two layers -- Products (the fields quoted) and Store inventory (availability, pricing, quantity, aisle/bay/shelf). There is no component-of-a-component relation anywhere in it and no cost roll-up; the only cost-like fields are valueCents and details.weightedItemInfo.valueCentsPerMeasurementUnit. No schema among the 429 documented component schemas carries recipe, sub-recipe, BOM or ingredient. Vocabulary controls across all 477 documents: 'sub-recipe', 'BOM', 'bill of materials' and 'plate cost' are 0/0 in text and raw; 'recipe' resolves to one blog sentence about a dinner recipe plus raw-byte hits that are www build comments about CSS; 'ingredient' resolves to 12 hits in 5 documents, every one catering or grocery blog prose about food, never a product-data relation. Open: the Portal has screens the API never exposes, though a plate-costing module absent from both a 429-schema manifest and the catalog reference page is not plausibly a hidden screen. https://docs.usenash.com/reference/store-catalog · retrieved 2026-09-06 adversarially verified
Stores purchase unit, recipe unit, and count unit per item with explicit conversion factors, plus a yield/waste percentage applied to raw-to-usable conversion.
inventory-unit-conversion-yields
This page is the closing instrument: it publishes a size-specification units reference closed at G, KG, ML, L and EA, and states that a product carries exactly two measures -- one labeled size with one unit, and one physical weight in kg -- which serve different purposes and are explicitly not converted into one another. There is no purchase/recipe/count unit triple, no conversion-factor field and no yield or waste percentage; the only unit-bearing fields among the 429 documented schemas are weightUnit, lengthUnit and valueCentsPerMeasurementUnit. Corpus-wide zeros in stripped text and raw bytes: 'conversion factor', 'unit of measure', 'UOM', 'purchase unit', 'par level' and 'depletion'; 'yield' hits 3 documents, all the verb. https://docs.usenash.com/api-reference/store-catalog/product-catalog-examples · retrieved 2026-09-06 adversarially verified
Produces a theoretical-vs-actual usage variance report per item for a defined count period, showing theoretical usage from POS sales times recipe, actual usage from counts plus receipts, and the variance in both units and currency. differentiator
inventory-theoretical-vs-actual
Not scored by this record.
Depletes ingredient on-hand quantities in near real time as orders are fired at the POS, including depletion driven by modifier selections, not only in an end-of-day batch. differentiator
inventory-realtime-depletion
Not scored by this record.
Automatically 86s (marks unavailable) menu items on the POS, online ordering, and connected third-party delivery menus when a component ingredient hits zero or a configured threshold. differentiator
inventory-86-auto-sync
Not scored by this record.
Supports full physical inventory, ad-hoc spot counts of a subset, and scheduled recurring cycle counts, with each count's variance recorded as separate history rather than overwriting prior counts.
inventory-count-modes
Nash's only write path into inventory is this bulk upsert of current levels: it overwrites quantity rather than recording a count event, which is precisely what the claim says must not happen. The read side is a filtered query by store or product with pagination. Of the 429 documented component schemas, 16 are inventory schemas (discount, pagination, provider config, sync, details, weighted-item info, list input/output, upsert row) and none is a count session, count type or variance record. Corpus-wide zeros in stripped text and raw bytes: 'cycle count', 'spot count', 'physical inventory', 'stock count', 'stocktake'. Open: the Portal Store Inventory screen could in principle offer a counting UI the API never exposes, and nothing published describes one either way. https://docs.usenash.com/api-reference/store-catalog/create-or-update-inventory · retrieved 2026-09-06 adversarially verified
Provides a mobile/tablet counting app supporting barcode or QR scanning that continues to accept counts with no network connectivity and syncs on reconnect.
inventory-mobile-count-offline
Not scored by this record.
Ships pre-built electronic vendor catalog and order-transmission integrations with named broadline distributors (e.g. Sysco, US Foods, Performance Food Group) that send purchase orders and receive invoices electronically rather than by emailed PDF. differentiator
inventory-vendor-catalogs-edi
Not scored by this record.
Ingests supplier invoices from photo, PDF, or email and extracts line-item detail (item, quantity, unit, price) into the inventory ledger without manual line entry. differentiator
inventory-invoice-ocr
Not scored by this record.
Tracks per-item purchase price history across invoices and alerts when a received price exceeds the prior or contracted price by a configurable threshold. differentiator
inventory-price-change-alerts
Not scored by this record.
Maintains par levels per item per location and generates suggested purchase order quantities from on-hand versus par, with at least one mode driven by a sales forecast rather than a static par. differentiator
inventory-par-auto-suggest
Not scored by this record.
Provides a structured waste/spoilage logging workflow with reason codes that debits inventory and reports waste cost separately from usage variance.
inventory-waste-logging
Not scored by this record.
Supports inter-location inventory transfers as a two-sided transaction crediting the sending location and debiting the receiving location, with an in-transit or approval state.
inventory-transfers
Not scored by this record.
Supports a commissary/central kitchen model where one location produces prep items and issues or sells them to other locations at a computed transfer cost.
inventory-commissary
Not scored by this record.
Captures lot/batch numbers at receiving and links them through production to sales or transfers, enabling a backward and forward recall trace.
inventory-lot-traceability
Not scored by this record.
Tracks expiration or use-by dates on received and prepped items and surfaces an expiring-soon report or alert before spoilage.
inventory-shelf-life-expiry
Not scored by this record.
Supports partial-bottle liquid inventory by weight (scale integration) or by bottle fraction for bar and beverage counting.
inventory-bar-partial-bottle
Not scored by this record.
Exports period COGS and accounts-payable invoice detail in a named accounting system's import format (e.g. QuickBooks, Sage Intacct, NetSuite) with GL account mapping configurable per item category.
inventory-cogs-gl-export
Not scored by this record.
Inventory and recipe costing are delivered natively by the POS vendor rather than requiring a separately-contracted third-party product (e.g. MarginEdge, MarketMan, Restaurant365) to function. differentiator
inventory-native-not-partner
Not scored by this record.
Reporting, BI & data access
Provides a live sales dashboard reflecting transactions within minutes of the sale, accessible from both a browser and a mobile app off-premise.
reporting-realtime-dashboard
Delivery performance analytics via the platform and its agent; no sales dashboard. https://www.nash.ai/ · retrieved 2026-08-01
Generates a daily close-out/EOD report reconciling gross sales, net sales, tax, tips, discounts, refunds, tender types, and expected cash deposit in one document.
reporting-eod-closeout
Nash has a reporting surface -- Analytics is one of the Portal features in reference/roles-and-access, and release-notes/change puts customer and provider analytics at /analytics with CSV and Excel export -- but Nash's own description of what it answers is delivery performance from delivery data. The claim's ingredients are absent from the data model, not merely from Nash's report names: 'cash' returns zero across all 170 docs.usenash.com documents including the complete OpenAPI spec, and 'gross sales', 'cash drawer', 'sales tax', 'end of day', 'EOD', 'daily close', 'Z report' and 'closing report' all return zero across the 477-document corpus in stripped text and raw bytes ('net sales' resolves to a single blog sentence about catering P&L). No tender, sales or deposit field appears in any of the 429 documented schemas. A document reconciling an expected cash deposit cannot be produced from a data model that never records cash. Open: the Portal's Analytics report catalogue is not published anywhere in the corpus, so this rests on the data model rather than on an enumeration of reports. https://docs.usenash.com/nash-agent/overview · retrieved 2026-09-06 adversarially verified
Provides a product mix (PMIX) report at individual menu item AND modifier level with quantity, gross and net sales, filterable by daypart and revenue center.
reporting-pmix-modifier-level
The claim needs a modifier level to report at, and Nash's catalogue has none: this page enumerates the product record's required and optional fields in full (name, categories, weight, dimensions, identifiers; imageUrls, externalIdentifier, sku, description, attributes, details) with no option, choice or modifier relation. 'modifier' returns zero documents across the 477-document corpus in stripped text and exactly one in RAW bytes, a CSS comment on www.nash.ai/orchestrate, and is absent from all 429 documented schemas. The one lead that looked like a modifier group, /v1/options_group, is a dispatch-strategy options group -- its own summary is 'Create dispatch strategy' -- not a menu option. The report's other required axes are equally absent: 'product mix', 'PMIX', 'daypart' and 'revenue center' are all zero corpus-wide in text and raw. https://docs.usenash.com/api-reference/store-catalog/pick-and-pack · retrieved 2026-09-06 adversarially verified
Produces an audit report of comps, voids, discounts, and price overrides attributed to the employee who applied them and the manager who approved them, with reason codes and timestamps.
reporting-comps-voids-audit
Not scored by this record.
Reports cash over/short per drawer, per shift, and per employee, comparing counted cash to expected cash from tendered transactions and paid-outs.
reporting-cash-over-short
Not scored by this record.
Reports sales per labor hour and labor cost as a percentage of sales by hour, by department, and by employee, using actual clocked hours from the POS time clock.
reporting-labor-productivity
Not scored by this record.
Reports per-server metrics including average check, items per check, attachment rate for named categories, and tips as a percentage of sales. differentiator
reporting-server-scorecards
Not scored by this record.
Reports revenue and margin by fulfillment channel — dine-in, direct online, first-party delivery, and each third-party marketplace separately — net of marketplace commission fees. differentiator
reporting-channel-profitability
Not scored by this record.
Provides a consolidated multi-location report with side-by-side location comparison and drill-down from group total to a single location and then to an individual transaction. differentiator
reporting-multiloc-drilldown
Not scored by this record.
Includes a self-service report builder letting a non-developer choose dimensions, measures, and filters and save the result, rather than only fixed canned reports. differentiator
reporting-custom-report-builder
Not scored by this record.
Supports scheduling any report for automatic recurring delivery by email or to a shared destination on a defined cadence and recipient list.
reporting-scheduled-delivery
Not scored by this record.
Offers automated recurring bulk export of transaction-level raw data to a customer-controlled destination (S3, SFTP, Snowflake, BigQuery, or equivalent), not just manual CSV download. differentiator
reporting-raw-warehouse-export
Not scored by this record.
Publishes a documented public REST or GraphQL API covering orders, payments, menu, and labor data, with self-service developer credentials obtainable without a signed partner agreement. differentiator
reporting-public-api
Not scored by this record.
Emits outbound webhooks for order and payment lifecycle events to a customer-supplied endpoint, with documented retry behavior and payload signature verification. differentiator
reporting-webhooks
Not scored by this record.
API and raw-data access are included in the standard subscription rather than gated behind an additional per-location fee, revenue share, or enterprise-only contract. differentiator
reporting-api-not-upcharged
Not scored by this record.
Core reporting beyond basic sales summaries — labor vs sales, PMIX, comps/voids audit, multi-location comparison — is available on the entry-level paid plan rather than requiring a higher tier or an add-on analytics SKU. differentiator
reporting-tier-paywall
Not scored by this record.
Documents a historical retention window of at least 24 months of transaction-level detail queryable in the reporting UI, with no silent truncation or archive retrieval fee. differentiator
reporting-history-retention
Not scored by this record.
Sends proactive push or email alerts when an operator-configured metric breaches a threshold or deviates from its historical pattern (e.g. void spike, sales below forecast, discount rate anomaly). differentiator
reporting-anomaly-alerts
Not scored by this record.
Offers a natural-language query or AI assistant that answers ad-hoc questions against the operator's own sales and labor data and returns a figure or chart, not a generic help-article response.
reporting-nl-query
Not scored by this record.
Reports guest-level analytics including new versus returning guest counts, visit frequency, and lifetime spend cohorts tied to identifiable guest records from loyalty or online ordering. differentiator
reporting-guest-cohorts
Not scored by this record.
Produces a forward sales forecast at daypart or hourly granularity from the location's own history, exposed in the reporting UI and consumable by scheduling or ordering workflows. differentiator
reporting-sales-forecast
Not scored by this record.
Generates payroll- and tax-ready tip reporting: declared versus charged tips per employee, tip pool distribution detail, and a tax liability summary by jurisdiction.
reporting-tip-tax-compliance
Not scored by this record.
Multi-location, franchise & enterprise governance
Supports a named organizational hierarchy of at least three levels (e.g. enterprise > region/group > location) as a first-class object that reporting and permissions can be scoped to, not just a flat list of locations.
multi-location-org-hierarchy
Multi-organization API keys with a required Nash-Org-Id header imply org/sub-org scoping; a named three-level hierarchy is not documented. https://docs.usenash.com/home · retrieved 2026-08-01
Corporate menu items expose per-field override rules so a location can change some attributes (e.g. price, availability) while corporate locks others (e.g. name, image, recipe), and locked fields are not editable at store level. differentiator
multi-location-local-override-policy
Not scored by this record.
Supports price tiers/zones so one menu item carries different prices per location group, per order channel, and per daypart without duplicating the item record.
multi-location-price-zones
The documented schemas settle this by enumeration. ProductInputSerializer carries no price field at all, and price lives on StoreInventoryInputSerializer keyed by externalProductId plus externalStoreLocationId, so one product record does carry a different price per individual store without duplication, while InventoryProviderConfigInputSerializer adds a provider plus serviceType price. But the claim's three named axes are not met: there is no location-GROUP or price-tier object ('location group', 'store group' and 'site group' are zero across docs.usenash.com, and prices are set per individual store row rather than by a reusable tier), and there is no daypart -- 'daypart' is zero across all 477 corpus documents in stripped text AND raw bytes and zero in the published spec, the only time-bounded price being InventoryDiscount, an absolute startTime/endTime promo window rather than a recurring daypart. The priced subject is also a grocery Pick-and-Pack product, not a menu item. The existing grade-A delivery-zone-pricing:no is undisturbed: that Zone object carries no price and is a different object from store inventory. https://docs.usenash.com/api-reference/store-catalog/pick-and-pack · retrieved 2026-09-06 adversarially verified
Menu, price, and promo changes can be scheduled to activate at a future date/time interpreted in each target location's own timezone, and can be rolled back after activation. differentiator
multi-location-scheduled-publish
Not scored by this record.
A new location can be provisioned by cloning a documented configuration template (menu, taxes, roles, printers, modifiers, tenders) rather than being configured from scratch, and the vendor publishes the expected time-to-open. differentiator
multi-location-new-store-template
Not scored by this record.
The permission model distinguishes a franchisor/corporate tenant from an independently-owned franchisee tenant, so corporate can see franchisee sales and enforce config while the franchisee owns its own employees, banking, and labor data. differentiator
multi-location-corp-vs-franchisee-roles
Not scored by this record.
Calculates franchise royalty, ad-fund, and marketing-fee amounts automatically from POS net sales on a defined schedule, with a configurable royalty basis (gross vs net of discounts/comps/third-party). differentiator
multi-location-royalty-calculation
Not scored by this record.
Supports automated ACH/debit collection of calculated royalties and fees from franchisee accounts, with a franchisee-visible statement of what was charged.
multi-location-royalty-collection
Not scored by this record.
Provides above-store reporting that aggregates sales, labor, discounts, voids, and item mix across any selected set of locations in one view, with store-vs-store ranking and variance flags.
multi-location-consolidated-reporting
Not scored by this record.
Item-level sales roll up across locations under a shared corporate item ID even when stores have renamed or locally priced the item. differentiator
multi-location-normalized-item-rollup
Not scored by this record.
Gift cards issued at one location are redeemable at any other location in the brand, with a reported outstanding-liability balance and inter-store settlement/redemption reconciliation between owners.
multi-location-cross-location-giftcard
Not scored by this record.
A single customer loyalty profile, balance, and stored order history is shared across all locations in the brand rather than being per-location.
multi-location-cross-location-loyalty
Not scored by this record.
A single location/terminal can operate two or more distinct brands or virtual brands with separate menus, receipts/branding, and separately reportable revenue, on the same hardware and drawer. differentiator
multi-location-multi-brand
Not scored by this record.
Tax configuration is per-location with support for multiple simultaneous tax rates, jurisdiction-specific rules (e.g. prepared-food vs grocery, inclusive vs exclusive tax), and per-location tax exemptions.
multi-location-multi-tax-jurisdiction
Not scored by this record.
Supports locations operating in different currencies and languages within one enterprise account, with consolidated reporting converted to a reporting currency.
multi-location-multi-currency-locale
Not scored by this record.
Produces an immutable audit log of who changed which configuration object (price, tax, permission, discount) at which location and when, exportable or queryable by corporate. differentiator
multi-location-config-audit-log
Not scored by this record.
Supports SSO via SAML or OIDC against the customer's identity provider for back-office/above-store users, with SCIM or equivalent for automated deprovisioning. differentiator
multi-location-enterprise-sso
Not scored by this record.
Publishes a documented multi-location API (or data warehouse/BI export) that returns transaction-level data across all locations in one authenticated call, without per-location credentials. differentiator
multi-location-enterprise-api
Not scored by this record.
Labor rules (overtime, break enforcement, predictive-scheduling compliance) are configurable per location or location group and enforced at the terminal, not just reported after the fact.
multi-location-central-labor-policy
Not scored by this record.
Integrations, API & extensibility
Public, self-serve API reference documentation is readable without a signed partner agreement, NDA, or sales call.
extensibility-public-api-docs
docs.usenash.com is fully public and self-serve, with an OpenAPI spec explicitly published for LLM/tool consumption. https://docs.usenash.com/home · retrieved 2026-08-01
API access is included in the base subscription at no additional per-location fee, surcharge, or upgraded plan requirement. differentiator
extensibility-api-access-cost
Not scored by this record.
A free sandbox or test environment with seeded data is available to developers without owning a paid production account. differentiator
extensibility-free-sandbox
Not scored by this record.
Third-party apps authenticate via OAuth 2.0 with scoped, operator-granted, individually revocable permissions (not shared static API keys or credential sharing).
extensibility-oauth-partner-apps
'Nash APIs use API keys for authentication and authorization', sent as 'Authorization: Bearer $NASH_API_KEY' with an optional Nash-Org-Id header. There is no OAuth 2.0 authorization flow, no authorize/token endpoint and no consent grant anywhere in the API index. Keys are not wholly unscoped - the Portal lets you 'choose which organizations the key can access' and 'select the features the key may use', and a key 'can never do more than you can' - but they are static secrets the operator generates and must then share with any third-party app, which is the credential sharing the claim excludes; Nash's own warning is that a key 'enables direct access to the Nash API' and should not be shared unintentionally. https://docs.usenash.com/reference/authentication · retrieved 2026-08-09
The platform pushes real-time webhooks for order lifecycle events (created, modified, paid, voided, refunded) rather than requiring polling.
extensibility-webhooks-push
Webhooks push every delivery status change — assignment, pickup, dropoff — rather than requiring polling; these are delivery, not order, lifecycle events. https://docs.usenash.com/home · retrieved 2026-08-01
Webhooks are cryptographically signed (e.g. HMAC) AND documented to retry with backoff, with a replayable event log for missed deliveries. differentiator
extensibility-webhook-reliability
Not scored by this record.
A public write API accepts externally originated orders into the POS as first-class tickets that fire to KDS/printers and land in reporting.
extensibility-order-injection-api
Not scored by this record.
Every core object the API can read (orders, menu, customers, employees, inventory) can also be written or updated via the same API. differentiator
extensibility-data-symmetry
Not scored by this record.
API rate limits are published as specific numeric quotas with documented throttling behavior and headers.
extensibility-published-rate-limits
Not scored by this record.
The vendor is a named DoorDash Preferred Integration Partner (DPIP) under the 2026 program requirements. differentiator
extensibility-doordash-preferred
Not scored by this record.
Direct, first-party certified integrations exist with DoorDash, Uber Eats, and Grubhub without requiring a paid middleware layer (Otter/Chowly/Deliverect/Checkmate). differentiator
extensibility-first-party-delivery-integrations
Not scored by this record.
The POS is a supported endpoint for at least two major aggregation middleware platforms (Deliverect, Chowly, Otter, Checkmate, ItsaCheckmate).
extensibility-middleware-compatibility
Not scored by this record.
Native, vendor-maintained connectors exist for QuickBooks Online and at least one other GL/accounting system, with mapped journal entries rather than CSV-only export.
extensibility-accounting-connectors
Not scored by this record.
Labor hours export natively to at least two named payroll providers (e.g. Gusto, ADP, Paychex, Paylocity) without manual re-keying.
extensibility-payroll-export
Not scored by this record.
Raw transaction-level data can be exported on a schedule to a customer-controlled destination (S3/SFTP/warehouse/Snowflake share), not only viewed in the vendor's reporting UI. differentiator
extensibility-bi-data-warehouse
Not scored by this record.
The vendor operates a public integrations marketplace listing named third-party apps that operators can browse and self-install.
extensibility-app-marketplace
Not scored by this record.
Operators can define custom fields or run vendor-hosted custom logic/scripts against POS objects without a vendor engineering engagement.
extensibility-custom-fields-scripting
Not scored by this record.
The vendor supports a headless/embedded mode where a third-party UI (kiosk, web ordering, drive-thru) drives the POS transaction engine via API.
extensibility-headless-embedded
Not scored by this record.
The vendor publishes an API changelog and a stated deprecation/notice policy for breaking changes.
extensibility-api-versioning-deprecation
Not scored by this record.
A complete historical data export (orders, customers, menu, payments metadata) is available to the operator on demand, in a documented machine-readable format, at contract end. differentiator
extensibility-data-portability-exit
Not scored by this record.
Reliability, offline & operations
Order entry, ticket routing, and check printing continue on-terminal when the internet connection is lost.
reliability-offline-order-entry
Nash's own glossary places order capture in a third-party POS it names, and describes Nash's role as integrating at that POS, so there is no Nash terminal on which order entry could continue during a WAN loss. This replaces the migrated rationale 'Cloud API; no on-premise component', which was a premise rather than evidence. The only offline behaviour Nash publishes anywhere is the courier app's queue -- drivers adjusting item quantities while offline, changes queueing per stop and syncing when the device regains signal -- which is driver-side item action, not order entry. The raw/text gap on 'offline' is benign and was re-measured per host: on docs.usenash.com it is 2 documents / 5 hits in stripped text AND 2 documents / 5 hits in raw bytes, an exact invariance; the whole gap is on www (5 text vs 36 raw) and the raw-only hits are the schema.org string OfflineEventAttendanceMode in about 30 /events JSON-LD blocks plus two blurbs in a careers posting. Grade C: the settling sentence is on a first-party page written to sell. https://www.nash.ai/glossary · retrieved 2026-09-06 adversarially verified
Card payments can be accepted while offline via store-and-forward, not just cash-only fallback. differentiator
reliability-offline-card-auth
Not scored by this record.
The vendor publicly documents who bears the loss when a store-and-forward transaction declines after connectivity returns, and states any per-transaction or cumulative offline cap. differentiator
reliability-offline-decline-liability
Not scored by this record.
Multiple terminals continue to share a single check/table state over the local network while the internet is down (LAN-only degraded operation, not per-terminal islands). differentiator
reliability-lan-degraded-multi-terminal
Not scored by this record.
The vendor documents a local/on-premise transaction engine or edge server (not purely cloud-hosted request/response) for the ordering path. differentiator
reliability-local-transaction-engine
Not scored by this record.
Kitchen display and/or kitchen printer routing continues to function while offline.
reliability-offline-kds-printing
Nash enumerates its own merchant-side surfaces for a kitchen instruction -- the POS, the Nash operator portal, or an MCP call out to 'whatever runs the kitchen' -- which places the kitchen display and routing system outside Nash by Nash's own account, so there is no Nash KDS or kitchen-printer routing that could keep working offline. 'KDS' and 'kitchen display' return zero across all 477 corpus documents in stripped text AND raw bytes, and the published OpenAPI spec contains zero occurrences of 'kitchen', 'offline', 'print' or 'kds'. That spec census bounds the API only; the quoted sentence is what bounds the product. Open: the 168-page docs nav is a floor, not a census, so an unlisted page could in principle describe kitchen hardware. https://www.nash.ai/first-meter · retrieved 2026-09-06 adversarially verified
The system automatically fails over to a backup printer or KDS station when a configured kitchen printer is unreachable, and alerts staff.
reliability-printer-fallback
The only printer Nash publishes is a ZPL label printer for packing slips, and it is not an object at all -- it is two interpolation variables on an order template (packing_slip_pdf_url, packing_slip_zpl_url). There is no printer record, no printer-to-station routing and hence nothing to fail over to. Tokenised, 'printer' appears in 4 corpus documents: three renderings of this same release note (the docs page, the llms-full dump and the www release-notes copy) plus the brand-guidelines page telling designers to send EPS to a print shop; two further raw-byte matches are the substring inside 'Mercedes Sprinter' on fleet pages. The published OpenAPI spec contains zero occurrences of 'print' or 'printer'. Nothing published describes a backup printer, a station fallback or an unreachable-device alert. https://docs.usenash.com/release-notes/change · retrieved 2026-09-06 adversarially verified
The vendor documents its conflict-resolution behavior for edits made on two devices during a network partition (e.g. last-write-wins, merge, or operator prompt).
reliability-sync-conflict-handling
Not scored by this record.
The vendor publishes an explicit list of which features are unavailable offline (gift cards, loyalty lookup, refunds, manual card entry, text-to-pay).
reliability-offline-feature-matrix
Not scored by this record.
A public, per-component status page exists showing current and historical incident state without a login.
reliability-public-status-page
Not scored by this record.
A contractual uptime SLA with a stated percentage AND a service credit remedy is published or available in the standard agreement. differentiator
reliability-contractual-uptime-sla
Not scored by this record.
The vendor publishes written post-incident reports or root-cause summaries for major outages.
reliability-incident-postmortems
Not scored by this record.
24/7/365 live human support by phone is included in the base subscription, not sold as a premium support tier.
reliability-247-live-support
Not scored by this record.
The vendor offers in-person on-site installation and go-live support (first-party or certified dealer network), not remote-only self-install. differentiator
reliability-onsite-install
Not scored by this record.
A hardware replacement/advance-exchange program with a stated turnaround time is included or purchasable.
reliability-hardware-replacement-sla
Not scored by this record.
Operators can trigger and retrieve their own data backup/restore, or the vendor publishes RPO/RTO figures for data recovery.
reliability-backup-restore
Not scored by this record.
The vendor publishes a current PCI DSS v4.0/4.0.1 Attestation of Compliance or equivalent (e.g. validated P2PE listing) covering the post-March-2025 future-dated requirements.
reliability-pci-dss-4-attestation
Not scored by this record.
Multi-factor authentication is enforceable on back-office and POS administrative logins, with role-based permissions.
reliability-mfa-role-based-access
Not scored by this record.
A public, free training library (video/LMS) and a practice/training mode on the terminal exist for staff onboarding.
reliability-self-serve-training
Not scored by this record.
Any terminal can assume the master/server role automatically if the designated primary terminal or local server fails. differentiator
reliability-failover-terminal-role
Not scored by this record.
Terminals support an automatic cellular/LTE failover for connectivity, first-party or documented.
reliability-cellular-backup
Not scored by this record.
Commercial, compliance & data ownership
Vendor publicly offers a month-to-month subscription with no minimum multi-year term commitment for its core POS software tier. differentiator
commercial-month-to-month-contract
Not scored by this record.
Vendor's published terms of service or MSA state no early termination fee / no liquidated damages for cancelling the software subscription before term end. differentiator
commercial-no-early-termination-fee
Not scored by this record.
The auto-renewal term and the required cancellation notice window (e.g. 30/60/90 days) are stated in publicly accessible contract terms rather than only in a signed quote.
commercial-autorenew-terms-published
Nash's published US Customer Terms & Conditions (moved from nash.ai/terms/us-online-terms to nash.ai/legal/us-online-terms; quotations re-verified verbatim at the destination 2026-08-08) defer the whole term structure to the signed quote: section 6.A states 'The Term of these Terms and Conditions, including the terms applicable to any renewal thereof, shall be as set forth in the applicable Order Form.' No renewal length and no opt-out notice window are stated. The only day-count published against renewal is a fee-increase notice - 'Nash may increase the fees specified in an Order Form for a forthcoming Renewal Term upon written notice to Customer at least ninety (90) days prior to the commencement of the Renewal Term' - which presupposes renewals without disclosing their length or how to stop one. The published termination clause covers only for-cause termination (30-day cure for material breach, insolvency), not non-renewal. The UK terms (nash.ai/legal/uk-online-terms) publish even less: their section 6 is termination-only and contains no term-length sentence, while still invoking 'Renewal Term' in the fee clause; nash.ai/legal/payment-terms contains no term, renewal or cancellation-notice language at all. Positive evidence of absence: publicly accessible contract terms exist, define Order Form as Attachment A, and expressly place the renewal term and any notice window only in that signed Order Form. https://www.nash.ai/legal/us-online-terms · retrieved 2026-08-08
The POS software can be purchased and operated with a third-party payment processor of the operator's choice (no mandatory in-house processing lock). differentiator
commercial-processing-not-bundled
Not scored by this record.
Vendor publishes an interchange-plus (cost-plus) processing rate option with the markup stated as a specific bps + per-transaction figure, rather than only blended/flat card-present rates. differentiator
commercial-interchange-plus-published
Not scored by this record.
The processing agreement caps or prohibits unilateral vendor-initiated rate increases outside of pass-through interchange/network changes, or grants penalty-free exit on any increase. differentiator
commercial-rate-increase-clause
Not scored by this record.
Per-location and per-additional-terminal software pricing is published as specific dollar figures on the vendor's public site (not 'contact sales' only).
commercial-pricing-published
No pricing page or figures published. https://www.nash.ai/ · retrieved 2026-08-01
Individual modules (online ordering, KDS, loyalty, inventory, payroll, marketing) can be purchased à la carte and cancelled independently without repricing the base POS subscription. differentiator
commercial-module-unbundling
Not scored by this record.
All required terminals, KDS screens, and printers can be purchased outright at a published price, with no mandatory multi-year hardware lease or rental.
commercial-hardware-purchase-outright
Nash's own US contract defines the entire subject matter of the customer relationship as software -- the Nash Platform is 'the Nash API, website, software, and any related Nash technology', and Services means the Nash Platform and related or professional services -- with no goods, equipment or device supply leg anywhere in the definitions. So there are no terminals, KDS screens or printers to purchase outright, and no published price for any. 'hardware' appears in 23 raw occurrences across 5 www pages, every one of them the fictional demo merchant 'Helix Hardware' in a page mockup or a CSS comment, and zero times in any of the 17 /legal documents or in the published spec. The single equipment mention in the US terms is an indemnity carve-out for equipment NOT supplied by Nash. /legal/payment-terms enumerates fees as platform, service, catering and orchestration fees but introduces them with 'including but not limited to', so that list is a floor and is not what carries this verdict. Consistent with the existing commercial-pricing-published:no. https://www.nash.ai/legal/us-online-terms · retrieved 2026-09-06 adversarially verified
Vendor documents support for at least one non-proprietary/third-party hardware option (e.g. standard iPad, Epson/Star ESC/POS printers, generic cash drawer) rather than requiring vendor-only devices. differentiator
commercial-hardware-not-locked
Not scored by this record.
One-time implementation, menu-build, onboarding, and training fees are published as specific amounts or explicitly stated as $0.
commercial-implementation-fee-published
Not scored by this record.
Operators can self-serve export their full transactional history (orders, line items, payments, labor) to CSV or a documented API without contacting support or paying a fee.
commercial-data-export-self-serve
Not scored by this record.
Guest/customer records, loyalty balances or point ledgers, and gift-card liability balances are exportable in machine-readable form by the operator. differentiator
commercial-export-customer-and-loyalty
Not scored by this record.
Contract or documentation specifies a post-termination data retrieval window (a defined number of days during which the operator can still export their data) rather than immediate cutoff. differentiator
commercial-post-termination-export-window
Not scored by this record.
Published terms explicitly state the merchant owns its transaction and customer data, and constrain the vendor's right to use or resell that data (beyond aggregated/de-identified use) for its own products or marketing. differentiator
commercial-data-ownership-clause
Not scored by this record.
The POS is source-available or open source with a documented self-hosting option (source published under an OSI or source-available license, not merely an open API).
commercial-source-available-selfhost
Not scored by this record.
Vendor documents validated P2PE or hardware-encrypted card entry plus tokenization such that the merchant's PCI scope is reduced to SAQ A / SAQ P2PE-HW, and names the applicable SAQ.
commercial-pci-p2pe-tokenization
Not scored by this record.
Vendor documents PCI DSS v4.0.1 future-dated controls in effect since 31 Mar 2025 — notably MFA for all access to the cardholder data environment including POS and back-office logins, and (for hosted ordering pages) payment-page script integrity monitoring per Req 6.4.3/11.6.1.
commercial-pci-dss-4-controls
Not scored by this record.
Vendor states it holds a current SOC 2 Type II (or ISO 27001) attestation and will provide the report under NDA via a trust center or on request.
commercial-soc2-attestation
Not scored by this record.
Product provides in-app tooling for CCPA/CPRA and GDPR data-subject requests — locating, exporting, and deleting an individual guest's records — plus a published DPA the operator can execute.
commercial-privacy-dsar-tooling
Not scored by this record.
Vendor publishes an accessibility conformance report (VPAT/ACR) claiming WCAG 2.1 AA (or later) for its self-order kiosk and consumer web-ordering surfaces, including a documented tactile/audio non-visual access mode on kiosks. differentiator
commercial-wcag-kiosk-accessibility
Not scored by this record.
POS supports card-network-compliant dual pricing / cash discount or surcharging with automatic exclusion of debit and prepaid cards from any surcharge, and required receipt and menu-board disclosure of the fee. differentiator
commercial-dual-pricing-compliant
Not scored by this record.
Adversarial verification
An independent pass was instructed to refute this record, defaulting to downgrade when uncertain. It challenged 34 values — 29 upheld, 5 downgraded, 0 upgraded. It separately resolved 1 previously unknown values. This is published in full because a reader who can see which values were contested, on what evidence, and which way they moved has something no affiliate-funded comparison offers.
Pricing and identity
| Field | Verdict | What the verifier found |
|---|---|---|
| urls.primary | downgrade-to-no | The recorded primary URL 301s. Re-probed today with redirect:manual: https://www.usenash.com/ returns 301 with an empty body, and the live site is https://www.nash.ai/ (200, 125,501 b). Sixteen legacy usenash.com paths referenced from inside the corpus (/how-it-works, /delivery-providers, /pharmacy, /platform/*) all 301 as well, so the rebuild retired the whole old IA rather than aliasing it. Field corrected to the live host. source |
| org.name | upheld | The contracting entity is named in the vendor's own published terms: the Square Marketplace Terms (US) state 'Nash Technologies, the provider of the Nash Platform, is referred to herein as Nash.' Ownership and privately-held status unchanged; only the entity name is made specific. source |
| identity.one_line | downgrade-to-partial | 'No menu' was too strong and 'no payments' was imprecise. Nash publishes a two-layer store catalog - a central Product record with no price field, plus a per-store inventory row carrying valueCents - which is a real central item master with per-store price, and the 2026-08-01 pass did not have it. It is a grocery/retail pick-and-pack catalog, not a menu: 'menu', 'modifier' and 'topping' are all zero across the complete published OpenAPI spec. The payments half is upheld and now cited rather than asserted: 'Nash does not process payments for any services' in the vendor's own Square Marketplace Terms. source |
| pricing.software | upheld | Re-derived rather than assumed. www.nash.ai/pricing returns 301, and the 17-document /legal set defers every fee to the Order Form. The 2026-08-04 verification of commercial-autorenew-terms-published already established the same deferral for the contract term. Note the legal set is 17 documents, not the 3 this record had ever cited - including a general platform-agreement naming Stripe as the processor - and none of them publishes a figure. source |
| analysis | downgrade-to-partial | The single-sentence narrative asserted three absences and cited none, and one of the three was wrong. Rewritten against the 477-document corpus frozen 2026-09-06 to state what carries each absence, what the store catalog actually is and why it is not a menu, the retrieval surface and its limits (sitemap and llms.txt are one table rendered twice; the published OpenAPI spec strictly dominates the nav but its own completeness is unwitnessed, and the www.nash.ai copy is the byte-identical file rather than a second source), and why two cells stay unknown. source |
Capability claims
| Claim | As first scored | Verdict | What the verifier found |
|---|---|---|---|
| commercial-autorenew-terms-published | unknown / placeholder | resolve-to-no | The cell carried the never-examined marker. Nash does publish contract terms, and they expressly withhold the term: US Customer Terms & Conditions state 'The Term of these Terms and Conditions, including the terms applicable to any renewal thereof, shall be as set forth in the applicable Order Form.' Same deferral in the UK terms; portal/payment-terms has no term or renewal language. The only published day-count is the 90-day fee-increase notice ahead of a Renewal Term, which confirms renewals exist while leaving the renewal length and the opt-out window in the signed quote. That is the exact failure the claim describes, evidenced by the vendor's own terms rather than by absence of search results. source |
| commercial-autorenew-terms-published | no / B - 'Nash's published US Customer Terms & Conditions defer the whole term structure to the sig' | upheld | Staleness check flagged the cited URL as a 301. I fetched the destination, https://www.nash.ai/legal/us-online-terms, and confirmed both quoted sentences appear verbatim in its body - the section 6.A deferral of the Term and any renewal terms to the applicable Order Form, and the section 5 ninety (90) day notice for a fee increase ahead of a forthcoming Renewal Term. The redirect lands on the terms document itself, not a homepage or index, so the evidence is intact; only the address changed. I also re-fetched the two corroborating pages, which moved the same way: nash.ai/terms/uk -> nash.ai/legal/uk-online-terms and nash.ai/portal/payment-terms -> nash.ai/legal/payment-terms. The UK page does not in fact carry the same deferral sentence - its section 6 opens straight into for-cause termination and states no term length at all, while still referencing 'Renewal Term' in the fee clause - so the researcher's characterisation of it was wrong and has been corrected; the payment terms page has zero occurrences of 'renewal', 'Term of these' or 'Order Form'. The value stands at no: this is positive evidence of absence from the vendor's own published contract, not absence of search results. source |
| delivery-driver-roster | partial / B - 'A Fleet resource lets an org run its own drivers alongside carriers and report state inb' | upheld | The cited api-reference/introduction 301s to api-reference/api-overview, a different page that does not carry the researcher's Fleet-resource characterisation, so the original evidence is gone. I probed the host's llms.txt index (39,693 bytes, the full doc map) and retrieved guides/internal-fleet-setup.md, an admin guide that documents the driver roster directly and far better than the API introduction did. It establishes drivers as first-class entities with name, phone, vehicle and served store locations, an Availability toggle, and a web Driver App carrying assigned deliveries and history. It also establishes the limits: no clock-in/out, no in-store/on-run/returning state, history visible to the driver rather than reported to the operator, internal fleets provisionable only by Nash support, and the Drivers tab gated behind Nash Lite TMS. Partial stands on this document alone; only the address and the stated shortfall change. source |
| delivery-zone-pricing | partial / B - 'Store Locations & Zones resource defines origins and service areas; per-zone fee, order ' | downgrade-to-no | The cited api-reference/introduction 301s to api-reference/api-overview and no longer carries the researcher's sentence. I rebuilt the evidence from the host's llms.txt index and read reference/zones.md plus the full OpenAPI document served at api-reference/zones/create-a-zone.md (23,866 bytes). The zone create schema and the zone response schema list their properties exhaustively and contain no fee, minimum or promise-time field; the ZoneRestriction schema that carries 'zone-based rules' has only a name, an isActive flag and free-form metadata. I also grepped the entire endpoint index for fee, pricing, minimum, surcharge and promise: the only pricing endpoint in the API is refresh-order-quotes, which pulls prices from providers per order. Partial was too generous - none of the three configurable attributes the claim names exists at the zone level, so this is an enumerated absence rather than a limitation, and it becomes no at grade A on the vendor's own spec. source |
| extensibility-oauth-partner-apps | no / B - 'Auth is API keys sent as a bearer token, not OAuth 2.0 with operator-granted revocable s' | upheld | The cited api-reference/introduction 301s to api-reference/api-overview, so I re-derived the evidence. reference/authentication.md states 'Nash APIs use API keys for authentication and authorization' and shows the Bearer header; reference/generating-api-key-and-org-id.md documents key creation in the Portal. I searched the complete endpoint index at llms.txt for oauth, authorize, token, consent and scope and found no authorization-code flow of any kind. The no stands on a positive statement of the mechanism rather than on absence of search results. One correction to the researcher's reasoning: Nash keys are not unscoped - the Portal restricts a key to chosen organizations and chosen features and keys are listed and removable - so the accurate basis for no is the absence of OAuth and the requirement that a third party be handed a static operator secret, not a lack of scoping. source |
| menu-pricing-nested-modifiers | no / F - Migrated from the 2026-08-01 research pass; no source URL was recorded." | upheld | Re-derived the spec myself: 187 operations, 429 schemas, zero 'modifier'. The analyst row was sound but leaned on the coordinator's claim that the two published copies of the spec are a second instrument; they are byte-identical after canonicalisation, so that corroboration is removed and the grade drops from A to B, the absence being bounded only by a manifest whose own completeness nothing witnesses. I also qualified the field-list argument: 423 of 429 schemas omit additionalProperties, so a property list is the documented ceiling, not a provable one. source |
| menu-pricing-modifier-price-by-parent-size | no / F - Migrated from the 2026-08-01 research pass; no source URL was recorded." | upheld | The row previously cited the `sizeSpecification` sentence, which is also the citation for inventory-unit-conversion-yields and never mentions a modifier -- the subject of this claim -- so as evidence for THIS cell it was decoration. I re-pointed it to the catalog reference page, which positively enumerates where price lives, and re-derived the vocabulary control myself ('modifier' 0 docs in text, 1 in raw). Grade B: a docs reference page, with the API-side bound resting on a manifest nothing independently witnesses. source |
| menu-pricing-topping-quantity-tiers | no / F - Migrated from the 2026-08-01 research pass; no source URL was recorded." | upheld | Re-ran the controls: 'topping' is 5 documents / 7 hits, all marketing prose, and zero in the spec; no tier or multiplier schema exists. The quote is on-subject, since it is Nash's only price-multiplier construct, so the row stands, but the grade drops from A to B because the absence rests on a self-witnessed manifest plus one docs page, and the note no longer claims the two published spec copies corroborate each other. source |
| digital-first-party-web | no / F - Provides tracking and post-purchase experience, not an ordering storefront." | downgrade-to-unknown | Value change, no -> unknown. The analyst flagged the Agentic Commerce thread and could not close it; neither could I. Nash's glossary places a consumer-facing 'conversational storefront' inside its own platform layer taxonomy with no product page, no docs page and no API operation behind it, while a sentence on that same page and the white-label glossary entry point the other way. An announced consumer purchase surface forbids a scored `no` on the vendor's own first-party ordering channel, so the honest state is unresolved at grade F. |
| digital-menu-single-source | no / F - Migrated from the 2026-08-01 research pass; no source URL was recorded." | upheld | Tested whether a marketing sentence about what Nash 'plugs into' can be evidence about what Nash does not do. It can here, because it is a statement about the boundary of Nash's own product rather than about a competitor, and because the docs-side and spec-side absence of any menu object agrees with it; I re-derived both ('menu' on 4 of 169 docs pages, all UI menus; zero in the spec). Grade C is right for a vendor page written to sell. source |
| digital-account-saved-payment | no / F - Migrated from the 2026-08-01 research pass; no source URL was recorded." | upheld | The row cited the AUSTRALIAN Square terms for their stronger wording on a US-primary record; I re-pointed it at the US document with its own weaker sentence and put both the jurisdiction and the Square-Marketplace scope in the note. I also read /legal/platform-agreement, the general contract this record has never cited: it carries no comparable sentence, only merchant-side Payment Method clauses, so it is not a better source. One control figure corrected: 'reorder|re-order' is 7 hits across 7 documents, not 1, though none of them is a consumer reorder. source |
| payments-emv-nfc | no / F - Not a payments product." | upheld | The row argued from the two published copies of the spec to 'a census of the API, not a crawl floor'; that inference is void, since the two copies are byte-identical after canonicalisation. I re-derived the vocabulary controls (EMV, NFC, contactless, Apple Pay, Google Pay all 0/0 in text and raw) and the schema census myself, so the verdict stands on a re-worded basis: a documented ceiling on a vendor manifest whose completeness nothing independently witnesses. source |
| payments-gift-cards | no / F - Migrated from the 2026-08-01 research pass; no source URL was recorded." | upheld | Re-ran the controls: gift card and stored value are zero in text and raw across the whole corpus and zero in the spec. I re-derived the 404 discrimination myself -- a fabricated www slug and www.nash.ai/gift-cards both return an identical 27,769 b body, while the docs host returns about 700 b for fabricated slugs against 11,665 b for a real page -- and made the note say explicitly that a 404 on a guessed slug bounds only that slug. Removed the claim that the two spec copies corroborate each other. source |
| payments-refund-void-controls | no / F - Migrated from the 2026-08-01 research pass; no source URL was recorded." | upheld | Checked the premise this row rests on and re-worded it: a response schema's property list is the DOCUMENTED ceiling, not a logical one, because 423 of Nash's 429 schemas omit additionalProperties and dozens carry a free-form metadata-style property. I re-derived the void homonym control myself (13 tokenised hits, all legal or brand prose, zero POS voids -- the brief's figure was 18, so the count is a reader artefact and only the invariance is published) and confirmed the RefundRequestResponse field list. Verdict unchanged. source |
| guest-loyalty-unified-profile | no / F - Migrated from the 2026-08-01 research pass; no source URL was recorded." | upheld | Re-derived the controls (guest profile, dedup and segmentation 0/0 in text and raw; no guest or profile schema in the spec) and confirmed the quoted enum. Removed the sentence claiming the two published copies of the spec agree and therefore bound the API as a census: they are one build artifact on two hosts. Grade B rather than A for the same reason -- an absence bounded only by a manifest whose completeness nothing witnesses. source |
| guest-loyalty-accrual-models | no / F - Migrated from the 2026-08-01 research pass; no source URL was recorded." | upheld | Re-derived the controls: 'loyalt' is 27 documents corpus-wide and zero across all 170 docs.usenash.com documents including the spec, which is the stronger form of the bound and is now in the note. Downgraded the grade from C to D because the citation is a blog post, which the evidence table classes as a vendor marketing claim rather than a pricing or feature page. Verdict unchanged. source |
| guest-loyalty-lifecycle-automation | no / F - Migrated from the 2026-08-01 research pass; no source URL was recorded." | upheld | This is the strongest row in the set, because it argues from a positively published closed enum rather than from a keyword zero; I confirmed both enums and the win-back and birthday controls. I removed only the inference that the two spec copies make it 'a census rather than a crawl floor' -- they are one file on two hosts -- so what is published is Nash's documented trigger catalog, and the grade is B rather than A. source |
| inventory-recipe-bom-costing | no / F - Migrated from the 2026-08-01 research pass; no source URL was recorded." | upheld | Corrected two published control figures that were wrong. The row said recipe AND ingredient return zero across the corpus in both forms; in fact 'ingredient' is 12 hits in 5 documents and 'recipe' is 1 stripped hit, all of them food prose in blog posts rather than the CSS-comment homonym the row described. The substance survives -- none of the hits is a data-model reference -- so the verdict stands with the controls restated accurately. source |
| inventory-unit-conversion-yields | no / F - Migrated from the 2026-08-01 research pass; no source URL was recorded." | upheld | Re-derived every control (all six zero in raw as well as text; 'yield' 3 documents, verb only) and read the cited page in full to confirm the units table and the two-measures sentence. This is the one cell for which the sizeSpecification quote is genuinely on-subject -- the claim is about units and conversions -- so the quote stays here, and I moved the other cell that was sharing it onto its own evidence. source |
| inventory-count-modes | no / F - Migrated from the 2026-08-01 research pass; no source URL was recorded." | upheld | Re-ran the five count-vocabulary controls in raw as well as text (all zero) and confirmed from the endpoint page that the write path is an upsert of levels with no count event. Removed the appeal to the second copy of the spec as corroboration. Verdict and citation unchanged. source |
| labor-clock-in-at-pos | no / F - Migrated from the 2026-08-01 research pass; no source URL was recorded." | upheld | Re-derived the timekeeping controls in raw and text (all zero, including plural and -ing forms) and read the RBAC page in full. Two qualifications are carried into the note: the feature list bounds features, not permissions, because the page itself names a permission outside the list; and the row's own observation stands that the earlier verifier's 'no clock-in/out' reading of guides/internal-fleet-setup was an inference from a field enumeration rather than a sentence in the document. Verdict unchanged. source |
| reporting-eod-closeout | no / F - Migrated from the 2026-08-01 research pass; no source URL was recorded." | upheld | Re-ran every control. One published figure was wrong -- 'net sales' is not zero corpus-wide but one blog sentence -- and is corrected here; 'cash' being zero across the entire docs host including the spec is the load-bearing one, and it reproduces. The row is careful to say the report catalogue itself is unpublished, which is the right limit to state, so the verdict stands. source |
| reporting-pmix-modifier-level | no / F - Migrated from the 2026-08-01 research pass; no source URL was recorded." | upheld | Re-derived the controls and corrected one: 'modifier' is zero in stripped text and one hit in raw bytes, so the row's single-hit figure was a raw measurement published as a corpus measurement. Confirmed the options_group disarming from the spec and the completeness of the field enumeration on the cited page. Verdict unchanged at grade B. source |
| labor-manager-override-audit | unknown / F - Read the complete docs index at docs.usenash.com/llms.txt (2026-08-04): every published page is list | upheld | The row asserted the standing 2026-08-04 rationale 'was false when written' rather than stale, inferring the past from a single byte count. I tested that with a Wayback CDX query, which proved decisive in the other direction: reference/roles-and-access has never been archived, and the archived docs.usenash.com/llms.txt of 2026-06-16 lists 120 pages without it, 56 of today's 168 pages having been added since -- including the whole nash-agent section and reference/store-catalog. So the earlier reader's premise was very likely true when written, the doc set grew, and the byte-stability measurement covers only 2026-08-31 onward. The accusation is withdrawn and the cell stays unknown at grade F. |
| multi-location-central-menu-publish | no / F - Migrated from the 2026-08-01 research pass; no source URL was recorded." | upheld | Value change, partial -> no. The analyst scored partial on Nash's central item master while stating the caveat honestly; I am the stricter reading that row invited. A grocery item master is not a corporate menu, and the claim is conjunctive: it requires a publish/version history naming what, when and by whom, which is absent from a fully enumerated catalog data model and from every catalog schema. Scoring partial would credit a delivery-orchestration vendor with a restaurant menu-publishing capability on the strength of a UPC catalog built for pickers. source |
| multi-location-price-zones | no / F - Migrated from the 2026-08-01 research pass; no source URL was recorded." | upheld | Value change, partial -> no, and grade A -> B. I confirmed every schema the row cites, so its positive finding is real: Nash prices one product per store without duplicating the record. But the claim names three axes and two fail outright -- no location-group tier, and 'daypart' zero in text, raw and spec -- while the priced object is a grocery product rather than a menu item. Grade B rather than A because the bound rests on a manifest whose completeness nothing independently witnesses and which bounds the API, not the Portal. source |
| reliability-offline-order-entry | no / F - Cloud API; no on-premise component." | upheld | The risk in this row is that a glossary definition of someone else's product category is being used as evidence about Nash. It works here because the second sentence is about Nash specifically and states where Nash sits relative to order capture. I re-confirmed the docs-side raw/text invariance on 'offline' and that the www gap is JSON-LD event markup, so no build-time strip is faking the absence. Verdict and grade unchanged. source |
| reliability-offline-kds-printing | no / F - Migrated from the 2026-08-01 research pass; no source URL was recorded." | upheld | Checked that the quote's subject really is Nash's own surface enumeration rather than a generic industry sentence: it is, and 'whatever runs the kitchen' is Nash placing the kitchen system outside itself. Re-derived the KDS and kitchen controls in raw as well as text, and the four spec zeros. Verdict and grade C unchanged. source |
| reliability-printer-fallback | no / F - Migrated from the 2026-08-01 research pass; no source URL was recorded." | upheld | Re-derived the control and corrected it: the row reported 6 documents 'all of them either this ZPL note or the brand page', but two of the six are the untokenised substring in 'Mercedes Sprinter'. Tokenised it is 4 documents, which is the stronger figure. Confirmed that print and printer are both zero in the spec. Verdict unchanged. source |
| commercial-hardware-purchase-outright | no / F - No hardware sold." | upheld | A definitions clause is the right instrument for this claim, and it sits on a vendor legal page, so grade B holds. I confirmed the Helix Hardware disarming, that 'hardware' is absent from all 17 legal documents and from the spec, and that the row does not lean on the 'including but not limited to' fee list, which is a floor rather than a ceiling. Verdict unchanged. source |
Sources
Every URL this record cites. 17 in total.
- https://docs.usenash.com/api-reference/introduction
- https://docs.usenash.com/home
- https://www.nash.ai/
- https://www.nash.ai/terms/us-online-terms
- https://www.nash.ai/terms/uk
- https://www.nash.ai/portal/payment-terms
- https://docs.usenash.com/llms.txt
- https://docs.usenash.com/nash-agent/guardrails.md
- https://www.nash.ai/legal/us-online-terms
- https://www.nash.ai/legal/uk-online-terms
- https://www.nash.ai/legal/payment-terms
- https://docs.usenash.com/guides/internal-fleet-setup
- https://docs.usenash.com/api-reference/zones/create-a-zone
- https://docs.usenash.com/reference/zones
- https://docs.usenash.com/reference/authentication
- https://docs.usenash.com/reference/generating-api-key-and-org-id
- https://docs.usenash.com/llms-full.txt