Know what AI can safely run.
Before an agent quietly breaks something. A two-week Audit scores each of your workflows: safe now, fix first, or don't automate.
Two weeks · fixed scope · you keep the map
Before you ask
-
We already pay for ChatGPT or Copilot. Why this?
Those are the tools. This tells you which work you can safely point them at. A capable model can't tell you which of your processes will break quietly when it runs them unsupervised, and the quiet breaks are the ones that cost money.
-
Do you need access to our systems?
No. The Audit runs on how the work moves: who owns it, how it gets checked today, what undoing a mistake costs. No logins, no production access, nothing of yours leaves your side.
-
What decides $5K versus $15K?
How many workflows, and how well they're written down. A handful inside one team sits at the low end. Several teams, or processes nobody has ever documented, sit at the high end. You get one fixed number before we start, and it doesn't move.
The proof
I ran the Audit on myself and published all of it.
Five workflows I run every day, scored the same way yours would be. Unedited, including the one that scored 4 out of 10, which I let run on its own anyway, and what that cost me.
- Safe now
- 10
- Safe now
- 9
- Fixable first
- 6
- Fixable first
- 5
- Do not automate
- 4
Safe now
Safe now
Fixable first
Fixable first
Do not automate
Why me
- $62
- frontier-model cost · last 30 days
- 12
- agents in service
- 3
- shipped · last 7 days
- $496
- frontier-model cost · lifetime
I'm not selling a framework I read about.
I run my own AI agents on my own hardware, every day, on real work. I've had them say a job was done when it wasn't, make changes I couldn't cleanly undo, and quietly cost more than they saved.
The checks that catch those failures run in my own business right now. The Audit points that same judgment at your workflows.