Skip to content

Why this shape

What this looks like when the system has to survive production

Most AI consulting ends in a deck that says "it depends". Ours ends in a document an engineer can build from: the architecture with the alternatives considered and why they lost, the metric the system has to beat and the test set it is scored on, the monthly running cost at your real volume, and a phased plan with a price for each phase.

Because the same people build the systems, the advice is tested against what survives production. That includes the recommendation not to build: when classical ML, a deterministic workflow or a process change solves the problem better than a language model, the review says so, and we would rather lose the build than deliver an expensive system that underperforms a simpler one.

What you get

Delivered as a working production system, in your cloud account

Discovery

Your data, current system, integrations, compliance constraints and the business outcome, in 2 to 3 working sessions with the people who own them.

Written architecture

Components, data flow, model selection and the trade-offs considered, documented in your repository.

Evaluation design

The success metric, the baseline it must beat, and how the test set gets built before any serious money moves.

Cost model

Build cost by phase and monthly running cost at your real volume, with the assumptions listed.

Build, buy or stop

A plain recommendation, including the option of not building, with the reasoning written down.

Phased plan

What each stage produces, where the risks sit, and what you can stop at if the number is not there.

Architecture

What a reviewed architecture looks like

A review ends with a diagram like this for your case, each component justified against alternatives, with the evaluation gate and the data boundary marked.

When this is the wrong tool

If you already know what you want built and the data is understood, skip the review and start with a scoped pilot; the first 2 weeks of a build cover the same ground.

DocumentsPDF · wiki · CRM · ticketsIngestionstructure-aware chunkingHybrid indexBM25 + dense vectorsUser queryRBAC scopedRetrieve + rerankcross-encoder, top-kGrounding gatecitation check · evalLLM answercited, traced, logged

Proof

Delivered systems closest to this work

Every figure comes from a system running in production for a real client.

Multinational enterpriseMulti-region · AWS

Search and automation across 5 million files that cannot leave their regions

1. Problem. 5 million+ files across regional data centers, S3, document systems, databases and application servers: contracts, financial statements, engineering reports, spreadsheets and email. The usual fix is 1 central index, and regional data rules ruled it out. So every cross-region question, and every workflow touching more than 1 system, depended on someone stitching answers together by hand.

2. Solution. The data stays in its region and the question travels to it. Retrieval runs locally and returns only what the asking user is already allowed to open. 7 LangGraph agents split the work, hand off to each other over A2A and reach each system through MCP servers with scoped permissions. Anything that changes a record waits for human approval, and n8n keeps ingestion, approvals and notifications moving around the clock.

LangGraphA2AMCPn8nOpenSearchLangSmith

Client name withheld under NDA. Ongoing 12-month program; figures are from the agreed evaluation set and the delivered milestones.

3. Impact

5M+
Files searchable across regions, permissions intact
97.86%
Task-success benchmark target on the agreed evaluation set
7
Specialised agents coordinating over A2A
12 months
Ongoing program: 6 delivered, 6 more contracted
Financial ServicesUSA

One governance layer for 5 production models in a regulated FinTech

1. Problem. 5 AI models were running in production with no shared visibility, no drift detection and no governance. Model behavior was tracked by hand in spreadsheets. In a regulated financial environment, that is an audit failure waiting to happen.

2. Solution. A single LLMOps control plane across all 5 models: scheduled automated evaluations, statistical drift detection against rolling baselines, shadow deployment and A/B testing before any version reaches live traffic, and a full model registry with SOC 2 compliant lineage and approval workflows.

MLflowAWS SageMakerArize PhoenixSOC 2

3. Impact

5
Production models unified under one platform
Auto
Drift detection replacing manual review
SOC 2
Audit-ready model lineage for compliance
3x
Faster safe promotion via shadow testing

Questions

AI consulting services: what buyers ask first

From $2,500, fixed price, 2 weeks. The written plan is yours to take to any vendor, and if you go ahead with us the review fee is credited against the build.