Have the Agent Your Business Needs Built.
The catalogue is short on purpose, so the agent for your problem may not be in it. A custom agent puts it there: built for your business, against cases you write, with a fixed quote before anybody starts.
It passes the cases you wrote, or you do not pay.Not a delivery date. A date tells you nothing about whether the thing works.
- Adaptations From
- $750
- USD, once, plus runtime
- New Agents From
- $2,500
- USD, once, plus runtime
- Fit Answer And Quote
- Free
- No retainer, ever
What it costs.
Three engagements, each paid once. What recurs afterwards is runtime, and it is quoted with the build fee rather than appearing later.
Written Solution Plan
$250USD, once
One bounded problem, answered in writing: the steps in order, the configuration to change, the files or prompts you need, and somebody to come back to when it does not go as written.
What recurs
Nothing recurs. It is a document and a short follow-up, not a service.
If you commission a build out of it within sixty calendar days, the $250 comes off that build once. Said here, before you pay, rather than discovered afterwards.
Adapt An Existing Agent
From$750USD, once
One workflow on an agent that already exists: your sources, your rules, your output, with the supported connections and the acceptance cases agreed before anybody starts.
What recurs
Runtime, charged separately and quoted with the build fee rather than after it. An existing hosted plan covers it where the workload fits one; a workload with different economics gets its own figure.
Only against an agent that genuinely exists. A catalogue concept is not an adaptation base — building one of those is a new agent and is priced as one.
Build A New Reusable Agent
From$2,500USD, once
A scoped new workflow or integration, with a fixed quote agreed before work starts. Non-exclusive: the general capability may join the catalogue, your records, credentials, rules and branding never do.
What recurs
Runtime, charged separately and quoted with the build fee. A build fee never silently includes unlimited operation.
The first fit answer and the quote are free, and always will be. There is no retainer, no care plan and no standing monthly fee for existing. Every quote states the one-time build fee and the recurring runtime charge as two separate figures, and a quote cannot be accepted without both of them on it.
You are not buying custom software.
A contractor builds you a thing and leaves, and you pay the whole cost of building it. This is different: you are directing a product and taking first use of it. You receive a copy that runs in your workspace, and the general capability then joins the catalogue for everyone else.
That is the reason it costs a fraction of a hire. Your records, your credentials, your confidential rules and your branding are never part of what gets reused, and your configuration never becomes another customer’s default. If your problem is genuinely yours alone it is probably not a custom agent — and if it is not, somebody else is about to subsidise the next improvement to the thing you asked for.
Commissioning an agent is not acquiring an application. You are not buying the underlying intellectual property, and the applications for sale are a different transaction entirely.
It passes the cases you wrote, or you do not pay.
Not a delivery date. A date is easy to hold and tells you nothing about whether the thing works, so the promise here is the outcome instead: you write the cases before anybody starts, and the work is not finished until it answers all of them correctly.
You describe the problem
Not a project brief. The job in a sentence, the systems it works against, and the output you want — then, on the second screen, real cases with their expected answers and anything the job depends on.
You get a fit answer, free
Whether this is a configuration job, an adaptation of something that exists, or a new build. Saying it is the first of those costs us a sale and is still the right answer.
You get a quote, free
A real figure for the work as described, with the one-time build fee and the recurring runtime charge as two separate numbers, and the acceptance cases written out so there is one agreed definition of working. A quote cannot be accepted without both figures on it.
We build it
An adaptation starts from an agent that already exists. A new agent starts from nothing and is priced as one. Which of the two this is was settled at the fit answer, not after the invoice.
You run the cases
A case that fails is a defect we fix at no charge, and it is not delivered until it passes. If it never passes, you do not pay.
Agreed before anybody starts
The job, in one sentence.
What it reads from, and what it produces.
Two or three real cases, with the answer you expect.
The one that matters. Everything else in a brief is prose two people can read differently; real cases with their correct answers turn whether it works from an opinion into a test anyone can run.
What it must stop and ask about.
What it depends on that neither of us controls.
An export only one person can produce, an account nobody can grant, a format that changes every quarter. A fixed quote that did not name these is optimistic rather than fixed.
What is explicitly out of scope.
Two rules, and they cut both ways
A failing agreed case is a defect.
We fix it at no charge, and it is not delivered until it passes.
Anything outside them is a new job.
That holds during the build too: a change to the cases is a new quote. Said up front it is not hostile; discovered late it would be.
What an acceptance case looks like.
Three lines, each an input and the answer you expect from it. This one is written for this page; the cases on a real engagement are yours, agreed privately, and are never published.
| Input | Expected answer |
|---|---|
| A supplier invoice for 120 units; the goods receipt records 96. | Held back, with the quantity difference named. Not approved, not paid. |
| A supplier invoice with no purchase order anywhere in the export. | Held back as unmatched. Not guessed at against a similar order. |
| A supplier invoice that agrees with its order and its receipt. | Queued for approval, unchanged, and counted in the batch summary. |
Anything not on the agreed list is a change of scope and gets its own quote, during the build as well as after it.
What can actually be adapted.
An adaptation starts from an agent that exists and runs. That is what makes it $750 rather than $2,500: most of the work is already done and is being pointed at your sources, your rules and your output.
The five jobs in the public catalogue are concepts. They are specified and not built, so none of them is an adaptation base — asking for one of those is asking for a new agent, and it is quoted as one. Today the only built package is the Bill Difference Checker, and it is not published yet.
The fit answer says which of the two your job is, before any money changes hands. Selling an adaptation price for a new build and explaining the difference afterwards is not a mistake that happens twice.
What arrives.
The same handover the applications get, at a smaller size. Most of it is produced by the same checker that packages an application for sale, which is how work this size still arrives with real documentation attached to it.
The agent, running in your workspace.
A dependency licence inventory.
Every third-party package the agent depends on and the licence each one carries, so a buyer's own counsel can read it rather than take our word for it.
A software bill of materials.
The full dependency tree as it was at delivery, in a standard format.
A secret scan over the full commit history.
Not just the final state. A credential committed and later removed is still in the history, and that is the thing worth checking for.
The open dependency advisories at the time of delivery, dated.
A list with a date on it, not a badge. It tells you what was known then; it does not claim anything about what is known now.
The cases, as a test you can run again.
The same cases agreed at the start, kept runnable, so a change made later cannot quietly break the thing you bought it for.
One short document: what it does, what it needs, what it does not do.
Connections, and what is held.
An honest account of this is worth more than a reassuring one, and the reassuring version used to be on this page.
You connect the accounts. We do not ask for a password.
Where a system supports it, the connection is made by you, in your own workspace, through that system's own authorisation flow.
An OAuth token is still a credential.
It is held, it is scoped, and it can be stolen. Never asking for a password is not the same as holding nothing sensitive, and the previous version of this page implied that it was. A token is stored encrypted, scoped to the narrowest permission the job can be done with, held in your workspace rather than shared across customers, and revocable by you from the system that issued it without going through us.
Some systems have no token to issue.
Where the only way in is an interface key or a service account, that is what gets used, and it is named in the quote before the work starts rather than discovered during it. A credential like that is a bigger exposure than an OAuth token and it is treated as one.
What we can and cannot promise.
We can promise least privilege, encryption at rest, isolation between workspaces, and revocation you control. We cannot promise that a credential held by anybody can never be compromised, and a studio that tells you otherwise is describing a wish.
Sometimes configuration is enough.
Plenty of problems that sound like they need an agent need two systems configured to talk to each other, or a setting changed, or one afternoon of work you could do yourself if somebody showed you which afternoon. Building you an agent for that would be an expensive way to be unhelpful.
When that is the answer, you get the answer instead: a Written Solution Plan for $250 USD, once — the steps in order, the configuration to change, the files or prompts you need, and somebody to come back to when it does not go as written.
If you commission a build out of it within sixty calendar days, the $250 comes off that build once. Said here, before you pay, rather than discovered afterwards.
Telling you this is the answer costs us a sale, which is exactly why it is worth saying. The fit answer that reaches this conclusion is still free — the $250 buys the written plan itself, not the right to a quote.
What we will not take on.
This is the useful half of the page. Saying what we do not do is worth more to you than another list of benefits, and it is how you can tell this apart from an agency that will take anything.
- Work that needs somebody permanent. If the answer is a hire, we will say so.
- A retainer. There is no care plan and no standing monthly fee for existing. Runtime is a real recurring cost and it is quoted as one; nothing else recurs.
- Anything the right answer cannot be written down for. If we cannot agree a test before starting, nothing here is a promise anybody can keep and neither of us should pretend otherwise.
- A rebuild of something that already works.
- An unbounded build commitment. A quote is fixed against a written scope. New requirements get a new quote, during the build as well as after it.
Describe the job.
Two stages. The first three answers are enough for a fit answer; the second stage is the part that makes a quote possible. Nothing you type is lost moving between them, and the fit answer and the quote are both free.