I opine the no. of pages doesn't need to be mentioned in this slide

identifies the person.

I prefer the detailed breakdown given in this website https://farm-cove-proposal.vercel.app/

Is this the on-set accountant? If yes, why only 1-2 days? If not, what would he/she do?

I can't understand what this means? Is it referring to any supplier specific information or the invoices or the legitimacy of the supplier? How can a person be documented?

Isn't this point implicit? Is there really a need to mention separately.

I don't see a point in retaining this one. It's already mentioned in the earlier bullets, why the duplication?

We haven't introduced Sana in this document yet, we shall either include a separate section or mention as Sana (our AI companion).

Minor correction - "AI processing, our team"

The context for these bullets is same though there is a slight variation in the perspective, I'd suggest compile them into one point "Workflow Efficiency - Save weeks of effort by automating email searches and empowering your team to focus on meaningful work, not inbox digging."

1. As far as I see it, we deal with 2 parties - BFI & HMRC.
2. And all these VAT, FEU, Tax claims etc are divisions of HMRC.
3. Why not say "BFI & HMRC (VAT, FEU & even tax) enquiries), to just be as clear as possible.

I opine "Task Tracker" would be better than "Task Transparency".

1. From - through; grammatically incorrect. Was it intended to mean Ecobride deals stuff from the start (BFI), till the end (CLAIMS)? Because this sentence is currently ambiguous.
2. This section shall show the product differentiation but the context says otherwise. It sounds like what any other film-prod a/c ing firm would do.