Find the constraint
We look for work that repeats, follows a recognizable pattern, and creates expensive drag when it gets missed. Sometimes the answer is an agent. Sometimes it is a better process. We will say which one.
Start with the bottleneck
You bring the annoying thing. We bring the architecture.
No technical brief required. Show us the work, the tools, and what keeps going wrong.
Draw the blueprint
We map triggers, source systems, decisions, permissions, failure modes, and the points where human judgment should take over. The output is an architecture you can understand.
Approve scope and estimate
You see what the first useful version will do, what it will not do, which systems it touches, and what the build should cost. Work starts after approval and prepaid authorization.
Build and test on real work
We ship in tight build cycles. You see behavior early, run the system against real examples, and correct the edge cases before they become operating problems.
Launch, watch, improve
We connect the production tools, make failures visible, monitor usage, and keep the agent useful as the workflow changes. A launch is the start of the operating relationship.
Clear ownership makes agents useful.
You should know what you own, what Sagan owns, and where the machine stops.
You own the truth
Your team brings context.
- The real workflow, not the clean version in the SOP
- Access to the people and tools involved
- The exceptions that make the work hard
- Fast feedback on test runs
- Final judgment on customer and business risk
Sagan owns the build
We turn context into a system.
- Workflow and data architecture
- Build plan, estimate, and acceptance criteria
- Implementation, testing, and launch
- Logging, monitoring, and failure visibility
- Future build cycles when the work changes
Human review is a feature
The agent should know when it does not know.
We design explicit confidence thresholds, approval steps, exception queues, and audit trails. High-volume routine work moves. High-consequence judgment stays with a person.
What a good first build looks like.
Small enough to ship. Important enough to matter. Visible enough to improve.
Good signal
It happens every week
There is enough repetition to learn the pattern and enough volume to create real leverage.
Good signal
The inputs already exist
The work lives in email, forms, spreadsheets, a CRM, an ERP, or another system we can reach.
Good signal
A person can explain the rules
Even if the SOP is messy, someone knows how a good decision gets made and when to escalate.
Good signal
You can tell when it worked
The filing went through, the quote was prepared, the lead was routed, or the record is complete.
First conversation
Bring one workflow you are tired of apologizing for.
We will pressure-test the idea, name the risks, and show you what a sensible first release could look like.