Autonomous process agents
- Automation of multi-step business logic across ERP systems, databases and APIs.
- Elimination of repetitive manual entry, invoice verification and operational cross-checking.
20 years of enterprise architecture × modern applied AI
Helping small and mid-sized companies eliminate manual operational drag. We bring the discipline of large enterprise systems — without their budgets or their timelines.
Three reasons the project does not stop at the slide deck.
Native understanding of ERP systems, procurement, logistics and master data management. What works in large corporations, delivered at a scale that fits you. You will not have to explain approval workflows to us.
An ungrounded model answers even where it has nothing to go on. On an internal note that does not matter; on the reading of a contract or a policy, someone answers for it. That is why every answer is linked to a specific document or database record, with the page cited.
De-risk your investment. We build a functional, testable prototype on your real company data in two weeks or less, at a price agreed up front.
Three engagement formats, depending on where you are.
Three steps from the first call to production rollout.
Identifying the highest-ROI bottleneck, evaluating technical feasibility and agreeing on a measurable criterion by which you will judge the prototype.
Building and testing the solution on representative client data.
Production deployment, API integrations, security validation and staff training.
Two weeks is our prototype, not your project. Validation runs at your company between the second and the third step — typically two to three months, after which you decide about going into production.
Not every company needs what we build. Where you stand decides who helps you most — and for the first two stages that is not us.
Nobody in the company uses AI systematically, and there is no record of who is already trying it privately.
People have e-mails drafted or documents searched, but nobody knows which of it holds up.
You have measured that it works. The data still travels between two windows by hand.
The process reaches into ERP, a database or an API. Someone answers for mistakes, and the result has to be provable, not just convincing.
We build LLM-agnostic solutions — the model is a replaceable part, not a dependency. We pick the framework to fit the process, not the trend.
Application logic stays decoupled from any single model, so switching providers or moving to a local model does not mean rewriting the solution. We assemble the stack around your security, operations and budget constraints. If wiring existing tools together is still enough for you, we will say so. Once it is not, we build on top of it — n8n handles the surroundings of the process here, not the decision logic.
CASE STUDY / LIVE ASSET
What is the notice period in the supplier framework agreement?
The notice period is three months and starts on the first day of the month following delivery of the notice.
[Article 12.3, Page 8]
Source verified
Ing. Tomáš Kraus
Founder and principal architect
Over 20 years of enterprise consulting, business process design and systems architecture in SAP. Today an AI engineer focused on deterministic LLM implementations where mistakes are expensive.
Six questions that come up almost every time. We answer them before you have to ask.
Source code, the architecture blueprint, documentation, prompts and configuration. The solution runs on your infrastructure or in your cloud, not on ours. Another supplier or your own people can take it over.
Application logic stays decoupled from the model, so switching providers or moving to a model running on your own premises does not mean rewriting the solution. Approaches and prompts are handed over with the code.
The prototype price is confirmed up front. The scope of the rollout that follows is decided on its result and on the criterion we agreed during the first call — not on an estimate made at the start.
To your infrastructure or your cloud tenant. We do not train models on client data. Access to documents is governed by a permission model, so each user sees only what they are entitled to.
It is a real risk for any system that processes incoming documents and e-mail. We keep instructions separate from the data being processed, the agent holds only the permissions a given step needs, and sensitive actions are confirmed by a person.
The agent takes over the repetitive part; the decision stays with a person. For every process we set out in advance where the checkpoint is and who signs off the output — without that the system would not clear your own internal approval anyway.
Tell me where the drag is worst. On the first call we work out whether automating it is worth it.