> Reading enrichment results and provider attribution

TL;DR: Each enriched field shows the value + provider + timestamp + confidence. Hover or click to see the metadata. Same shape on Lead detail, Account detail, API responses, and CSV exports.

Expand

What's attached to each enriched value

For every channel:

• Value — the actual contact (e.g. person@company.com)
• Source provider — which provider in the waterfall returned it
• Enriched at — timestamp
• Confidence — 0.0–1.0; provider-reported reliability score
• Verified — boolean; whether the value passed downstream verification (only set after a sync event)

On the Lead detail page

The Detailed Profile section renders the value visibly. Hover over any contact field → tooltip shows the provider + timestamp.

Click the value → small popover with:

• Full provider name
• Confidence score
• Enriched-at timestamp
• Clear and re-enrich action (forces a fresh waterfall run)

In API responses

Every /enrichment and /records/{id} response includes the metadata structure shown in the API article. Use it programmatically to gate downstream actions:

if (lead.channels.work_email.confidence >= 0.85) {
// Email is reliable, send outbound
} else {
// Confidence too low, route to manual verification
}

In CSV exports

When you export Leads with enrichment data, the columns include:

• work_email
• work_email_source
• work_email_confidence
• work_email_enriched_at
• (same shape for personal_email, phone, linkedin_url)

This makes the export self-documenting — anyone consuming the file can see where each data point came from.

Debugging a bouncing email

Standard flow:

1. Email bounces in your sequencer (Smartlead, Apollo, etc.)
2. Sequencer webhook fires bounce event into Unstuck Engine
3. Lead's record updates work_email_verified = false, bounce_count increments

To recover:

1. Open the lead detail
2. Click work_email → see which provider supplied it (e.g. "Provider B, confidence 0.78")
3. Action Clear and re-enrich for the work_email channel
4. Waterfall re-runs — the previous provider is deprioritized in this run (the system avoids re-trying a provider that just bounced)
5. A different provider may return a different email; that becomes the new value

Auditing data quality across the workspace

Two queries via Copilot:

• > show me leads with work_email confidence below 0.8 — surfaces the lower-confidence enrichments for spot-check
• > which provider has the highest bounce rate this month? — informs whether to reorder the waterfall

Or via the Insights page → Enrichment Quality view → grouped by provider with bounce rate, reply rate, confidence histograms.

When the value looks wrong

Sometimes a provider returns a plausibly-formatted but incorrect contact (e.g. the previous employee's email at a company). To flag:

1. Click the value → Report as incorrect
2. The provider is downweighted for this workspace
3. The value is cleared from the record
4. Re-enrichment can be triggered to get a replacement

The downweighting is workspace-scoped; a provider that's unreliable for your motion isn't necessarily unreliable for everyone.

Related

• What enrichment is and the waterfall model
• Enriching from a Lead or Account detail page
• Enriching via API or MCP
• Lead detail — Enrichment panel