
Built with your team
Your people sit in on the build. They learn to read a run, adjust a guideline, and reject a bad version.
How rollout works
One place where the agent's tools, its limits, the point a person approves, and what gets logged are all written down, before it touches real work.
Each agent gets an explicit list of systems and actions. Anything outside that list is denied by design.
The review point is a setting your owner controls and can change.
Inputs, the decision, the reviewer, the outcome: per run, readable without us.
An explicit allow-list of systems and actions; everything else is refused.
Consequential actions wait for a named approver before anything happens.
Run a change against saved cases before it reaches live work.
Every guideline change is a version with a diff and a reviewer.
Inputs, decisions and outcomes per run, readable by your own team.
Return to a known-good version in one step, without a project.
Who may approve, change or read is set by you, per role.
Take the whole trail out as a file whenever an auditor asks.

Your people sit in on the build. They learn to read a run, adjust a guideline, and reject a bad version.
How rollout works
We build the whole thing, document it, and hand over the ability to change it, with a retainer if you want one.
How an engagement runsProcedures, price rules and past decisions are turned into instructions the agent cites when it acts, and refuses when it cannot cite.

Before go-live, the agent runs against the messy cases your team collected: the short-ship, the refused document, the call in the wrong language.

Only on the actions your owner has explicitly allowed. Everything consequential waits in the review queue with a named approver.
The people you name. Every change is a version with a diff, a reviewer and a rollback, the same discipline as code.
No. Reading a run, approving an action and adjusting a guideline are designed for the operations owner. Building a new agent is our job or your engineers'. Your choice.
