One agreed review journey
A defined task for one user role, with one input format, one output format, and acceptance criteria.
We build a focused internal review tool that puts the source, AI-prepared findings, and your team's decisions in one screen.
From $6,000 USDOne-time project. Software and usage billed separately.
30 minutes with the co-founders. Check fit, tools and the next scoping step.
Spreadsheets and generic tools are useful until the real process lives in the gaps between them. A custom build makes sense when the workflow, interface, or integration is specific enough that adapting another product creates more work than it removes.
An internal review task is spread across documents, checklists, and spreadsheets.
A reviewer needs the original evidence beside editable findings and decisions.
You can start with one user role, one input format, and one required output.
From $6,000 USD
One-time project. Final scope and price agreed in writing.
Give your team one place to review AI-prepared work, check the source, and approve the next step.
Book a free scoping call ↗30 minutes with the co-founders to check fit, tools and the next scoping step. No obligation to proceed.
All prices are in USD. Third-party software, API usage, hosting and any telephony charges are separate. Support is optional; its coverage and limits are agreed separately. New workflows need a new scope.
A defined task for one user role, with one input format, one output format, and acceptance criteria.
The source beside AI-prepared findings, editable decisions, and a visible review status.
Checks using representative samples, operating instructions, and the agreed deployment setup. Hosting, ownership, and continuing maintenance are documented separately.
Bring one task and your current tools. We’ll discuss the first step in a free 30-minute call.
A reviewer needs to compare a supplier document with a requirements list.
Bring the source document and approved checklist into one workspace.
Show proposed findings beside the passages they came from.
A reviewer accepts, edits, or rejects each finding before an export.
Put the source, requirements, and proposed findings together so reviewers can inspect each decision.
Explore the workflow 02Guide a commercial team from approved scope and pricing inputs to an editable draft.
Explore the workflow 03Show suspected duplicates and inconsistent fields together with the evidence needed to resolve them.
Explore the workflowWalk a user through the task and define the non-negotiable result, not a long feature inventory.
Validate the interaction, integration, and AI quality before expanding the scope around uncertain assumptions.
Exercise permissions, failure states, accessibility, and recovery. Agree the handoff and launch decision separately.
Hosting, third-party licenses, source ownership, maintenance, and support are agreed in writing. Regulated or consequential decisions require additional specialist review.
Security and data questions ↗Focused internal AI tool starts at $6,000 USD for the starter scope shown on this page. We confirm access, scope, exclusions, timing and a written price before work begins. Third-party software and usage charges are separate; ongoing support is optional.
In 30 minutes, we discuss one task, your current tools and the result you need. We check whether the starter fits and what is needed for a written proposal. If paid discovery is needed, we explain its scope and price first. You do not need a prepared brief or a paid assessment to book the call.
We agree a baseline and acceptance checks with the person who owns the work. The agreed user can complete the review, correct findings, and produce the expected output on representative samples. Where relevant, we also compare manual effort, correction work and operating costs. These checks guide the handoff; they are not a promise of revenue or savings.
The service covers internal tools, customer workflows, and AI features in existing applications. The useful build depends on the user journey and the gaps in current software. Scope the screens, actions, integrations, and acceptance criteria together; an internal document review workspace is one focused starting point among those options.
An existing application can be the starting point. Review its architecture, user permissions, data access, deployment process, and the product team's responsibilities. The useful scope may be a focused feature inside the current experience, with an explicit fallback when AI output is unavailable or unsuitable.
The main drivers are user journeys, integration complexity, data preparation, permission requirements, AI evaluation, and production operations. Hosting, model usage, and third-party licenses are separate operating costs. Agree deliverables and assumptions before pricing, including how changes to the scope will be handled.
The schedule depends on unresolved product decisions, integration access, source quality, and the review needed for launch. Testing the uncertain parts first helps establish the remaining work. Agree milestones around working behavior and acceptance evidence, with client dependencies identified alongside development tasks.
Source-code ownership, licensing, access to repositories, and data-handling terms must be agreed in the contract before work starts. Third-party components can carry separate licenses and usage terms. The handoff should identify what is delivered and what is needed to operate or change it.
Agree who deploys updates, monitors failures, manages credentials, and handles user questions. The handoff can include operating documentation and deployment requirements. Ongoing development, maintenance, and support need an explicit scope, including how urgent issues and changes to external services will be handled.