Free AI automation audit on your first call. Book yours ›
AI Agents

An agent that does the job, not one that talks about it.

A chatbot answers. An agent acts: it books the slot, drafts the quote, moves the ticket, reconciles the row. That difference is the whole engineering problem, because a wrong answer is a bad experience and a wrong action is a refund, a complaint, or a compliance incident. Everything we build here starts from what the agent is allowed to do without asking.

This is for you if

  • A queue of repetitive decisions builds up overnight and someone works through it every morning
  • The steps are written down and the exceptions are known, they are just done by hand
  • You already have APIs for the systems involved, or could have
  • Volume is high enough that a person doing it is a real cost, not a rounding error

It isn't, if

  • You want it to handle anything a customer might ask. An agent with an unbounded remit is a liability with a chat interface.
  • The action is irreversible and expensive, such as moving money or cancelling contracts. Those stay behind a human, and we will design the review step instead.
  • Nobody can describe the current process end to end. An agent built from a half-described process automates the half that was described.
How it works

What actually happens.

  1. 01

    Draw the boundary first

    What the agent may do alone, what it may propose for a person to approve, and what it must never touch. This is a business decision, not a technical one, and it is made before anything is built.

  2. 02

    Build the tools it uses

    Each action becomes a narrow, validated tool with its own permissions rather than a general key to your systems. An agent can only do damage through a tool you gave it.

  3. 03

    Test against the awkward cases

    Not the happy path, but the ambiguous request, the missing record, the customer trying it on. The agent's behaviour on those is what determines whether it can be trusted unsupervised.

  4. 04

    Traces, handoff, and rollout

    Every run leaves a readable transcript, so a bad outcome can be explained rather than guessed at. It goes live on a slice of the volume first, with a person watching, then widens.

What you get

  • Tool-using agents wired into the systems you already run
  • Explicit permission boundaries: what it may do alone, what needs a human
  • Traces and transcripts for every run, so a bad outcome is explainable
  • Handoff to a person built in from the start, not added after the first complaint

Built with

  • Anthropic
  • OpenAI
  • MCP
  • LangGraph
  • Temporal

The outcome

A queue that clears itself overnight instead of on Monday morning.

Agents that take actions in your systems, booking, quoting, triaging and reconciling, with limits on what they may do unsupervised.

Get a free consultation

Scope and a fixed price before anything is committed. No obligation to proceed.

Our process

No dark periods. No surprise invoices.

A structured engagement from the first call to launch, so you always know what is happening and what it costs.

Week 1 · Discovery

Scope & fixed price

Process audit
Written scope
One number
Sign-off

Then, every week after

A working demo.

We map how your business actually works today and where the hours leak. You get a written scope with a fixed price before anyone writes code.

Questions

The ones people actually ask.

What happens when it gets something wrong?

It escalates rather than improvises, and the trace shows exactly what it saw and chose. Designing the failure path is most of the work here, because a system that only behaves well when things go well has not been designed at all.

Can it work with our existing software?

If it has an API, yes. Where it does not, the honest options are a narrow integration layer or leaving that step to a person, and we will say which one your case is before quoting.

How is this different from workflow automation?

Workflow automation follows rules you wrote. An agent decides which step to take, which is worth paying for only when the decision genuinely varies. Where a rule would do, we build the rule. It is cheaper and it never surprises you.

Do you use MCP?

Where it fits. Model Context Protocol gives tools a standard shape, which makes them reusable across agents and easier to audit. It is a means to the permission boundary, not the point of the build.

What is the most expensive thing your team still does by hand?

Tell us, and we'll tell you honestly whether software can fix it, and roughly what it would cost. No pitch deck.