Investigate across your business
Work across documents, messages, and system records to explain recurring problems, compare conflicting information, and put the evidence where a person can check it.
AI & automation / Agents & voice
AI agents that see the work through.
Investigate a recurring problem. Prepare a decision with the evidence behind it. Carry out the next step through your existing tools. We build internal agents, customer-facing chat, and voice assistants around the work your team needs done.
Based in Bloomington, Illinois. Working with teams across the United States.
What you can put to work
More than a chat window.
The valuable part is what happens behind the conversation: finding the right information, checking it, and using connected tools to move a task forward. Voice and chat are ways to reach the agent—not the limit of what it can do.
Complete a multi-step job
Prepare a recommendation, draft follow-up, and take permitted actions through your APIs. Agree which steps can run independently and which need approval.
Support people in chat or on a call
Help staff, buyers, or customers navigate detailed information. Ask useful follow-up questions and hand over the context when a person needs to take the conversation further.
Worked example / Order-delay investigation
Find the pattern behind the late orders.
The order system says “supplier ready.” The warehouse says “arrived after cutoff.” Customer service sees another missed date. An investigation agent connects those records, tests the explanation, and prepares the next actions.
Records → explanation → reviewed action
01Follow the evidence
The jobReview six delayed orders. Compare promised dispatch dates, supplier messages, warehouse receipts, and dispatch notes. Separate documented causes from explanations that still need checking.
- Orders 1841, 1848 & 1855
- “Ready for collection” was recorded before the promised dispatch day. Physical receipt was after the 14:00 dispatch cutoff on each promised day.
- Order 1860
- Stock arrived before cutoff. Dispatch notes record a credit hold—not a receiving delay.
- Orders 1872 & 1883
- One has no warehouse receipt; the other has only 30 of 50 units. Neither has a confirmed dispatch date.
Why connect the sources?A status field alone does not explain the delay. The useful work is reconciling what each system means, following the timeline, and checking the exceptions.
02Test the explanation
Illustrative findingThree orders share the same sequence: supplier ready, receipt after cutoff, dispatch the following day. Dispatch notes confirm the cutoff was missed in each case.
What the records do not proveThey do not establish why inbound transport arrived late or who set the promised dates. Treat “supplier ready is being mistaken for available stock” as a hypothesis to check with the team, not a proven root cause.
Keep different problems separateOrder 1860 needs credit-release review. Order 1872 needs a confirmed collection and receipt time. Order 1883 needs the balance of the shipment or approval for a partial dispatch.
The decision this supportsReview how dispatch promises account for actual receipt and cutoff times. Do not automatically blame the supplier, rewrite delivery dates, or combine every delay into one explanation.
03Prepare the next moves
Purchasing · draft a targeted request“For order 1872, please confirm carrier collection and expected arrival. For order 1883, please confirm when the remaining 20 units will arrive.” Attach the relevant order references.
Operations · prepare a review taskBring the three missed-cutoff timelines to the dispatch owner. Ask whether promise-setting should distinguish supplier readiness from stock received, and what the approved rule should be.
Customer service · prepare an updateDraft a factual status explanation for each affected order. Leave revised delivery dates unresolved until purchasing and dispatch confirm them.
Where the agent can actIn a connected build, approved drafts can be sent and review tasks created through your existing tools. Permissions determine what runs automatically. Customer commitments and shipment changes in this workflow require approval, with an action record and duplicate-send protection.
Run the same investigation on a schedule or when an order is at risk. Give your team the exceptions and evidence—not another inbox to sort.
What an agent build includes
A working system.
A clear owner.
Start with a defined job. We scope the sources, connections, approvals, and checks before implementation, then test the first version against real operating constraints.
Need help choosing the job? The AI Opportunity Assessment is optional. A clear requirement can go straight to a private quote.
- Job and success criteria. Users, inputs, expected outputs, and a way to judge whether the work is useful.
- Knowledge and connections. Approved information, access limits, and the tools the agent needs to use.
- Evaluation before rollout. Ordinary tasks, missing facts, conflicting records, failed actions, and approval boundaries.
- Handoff and operation. Named owners, action records, operating guidance, and separately scoped support.
Related project experience
Built around real operations.
An agent is one part of the system around it. These projects show our work on operational software, data, and connected workflows. Explore the scope and delivery behind each.
Harvestry
A live cultivation platform bringing planning, production, and facility operations into one workspace.
First State Mortgage
Data modernization, reporting automation, and vendor coordination around an established mortgage operation.
Before we start
A few useful answers.
What can an agent do beyond answering calls?
Answer from approved information, prepare work for review, and take specifically permitted actions through connected tools. The scope determines what it may do on its own and what needs a person.
Can we begin without sharing private data?
Yes. A description of the task and fictional examples can be enough to scope a first version. Access to real systems or records is agreed separately before it is needed.
How do we evaluate the first version?
We agree acceptance checks for answer quality, source use, permitted actions, and human handoffs. The first version is tested against representative requests and failure cases before a wider rollout.
What does a first project usually cost?
The fit call is free. Implementation is quoted separately against an agreed scope; the assessment is not the build price. We can quote a clearly defined project directly. When broader analysis would reduce risk, the $999 AI Opportunity Assessment reviews opportunities across your business, ranks the three worth considering first, and gives you a 90-day roadmap within 10 business days after the required information is received. The fee is credited toward any scoped build.
What happens to exceptions and judgment calls?
They stay with people. Automation handles the routine steps and routes anything unusual to a person for review before it moves forward.
Who runs the system after it launches?
Day-to-day operation and handoff are agreed before launch. Maintenance, monitoring, response times, further development, and any on-site visits are covered by a separately agreed support scope.
What would you give an agent to do?
Describe the work, where it gets stuck, and what a useful result would be. No private records or app access are needed for the first conversation.