How it works
The boundary gets agreed before anything gets built
Four stages, and the first two produce documents rather than software. That order is deliberate: almost every automation project that fails, fails because the process was never written down.
We map the process as it actually runs
Not the version in the manual, the version your team does on a Tuesday. Who touches it, what they check, and what happens when something falls outside the rules. You get that map as a document, and it is useful even if you stop here.
We agree what the agent may decide
Three categories: what it does on its own, what it prepares for a person to approve, and what it never touches. Signed off before the build starts. This is the stage that takes the longest and the one that prevents the expensive mistakes.
We build one process and run it alongside yours
The agent works next to the existing way of working rather than replacing it on day one. You compare both outputs before anything is switched off, which means the decision to trust it is based on your own data.
We measure what it got wrong
What it handled, what it escalated, and where it was corrected. That last number decides whether the next process is worth moving across. A report that only shows successes is not a report.
Questions about how this runs
Can we stop after the mapping stage?
Yes, and the document is yours. Some processes turn out not to be worth automating once they are written down, and finding that out on paper is far cheaper than finding it out in a build.
Who maintains it once it runs?
Maintenance is part of the monthly plan. Processes drift, rules change, and an agent built once and left alone quietly goes wrong. That is why this is priced as a subscription rather than as a project.
What if our process changes?
Changes within the agreed scope are included. If the process changes shape entirely, it goes back to stage one, because a boundary agreed for the old process no longer describes the new one.
Do you work with our existing software?
That is the starting assumption. Replacing your stack to enable automation is a bigger project than the automation, and it is rarely necessary.
The first stage is a conversation, not a quote
Describe the work that repeats and we will tell you whether it is worth mapping, including when the answer is no.