Company AI assistants
Your docs, your identity provider, your escalation path. People get an answer with a link to the source, or a handoff to the person who owns it.
01
The source systems, who maintains each one, how often it updates, and what happens when a document is deleted. Stale material is a content problem we surface, not one we hide.
02
Your identity provider, roles, and groups applied when the answer is assembled — so the assistant cannot surface something the person asking is not cleared to see.
03
Every answer links its source and abstains when the material does not cover the question. Unresolved requests route to the team that owns them.
An internal assistant is worth building when the questions repeat and someone owns the answers. If the documentation has maintainers and your access groups are real, we can make it traceable.
Not the right call if documentation is unowned or contradicts itself, or no one can define an acceptable answer or escalation path.
01
Source material has owners and a workable freshness process.
02
Identity and access groups can be enforced at retrieval time.
03
Recurring questions or tasks justify a maintained interface.
A company AI assistant gives authorized users a governed interface to internal knowledge or workflows. Its useful boundary depends on source quality, permissions, citations, escalation, and ownership of incorrect answers.
It fits teams with maintained source material, recurring internal questions or tasks, and named owners for access and answer quality. It is a poor fit when source data is unowned or permissions cannot be enforced.
Builderz uses three entry offers: Architecture and delivery sprint ($3K-$5K), Production build ($10K-$40K), Reliability and rescue sprint ($5K-$15K). The project brief determines which offer fits; the proposal then defines scope, owner, acceptance criteria, exclusions, payment schedule, and change control.
Builderz starts with the workflow, authority boundaries, failure modes, and acceptance tests. Reliability targets, security controls, support terms, and deployment constraints are written into the accepted scope rather than implied as blanket guarantees.
Bring the source systems, authorization model, common questions or tasks, examples of unsafe disclosure, expected users, and the owner responsible for knowledge quality.
Let's work together
Tell us what is blocked, who owns the decision, and what budget is approved. Qualified briefs get a one-business-day review.
Acceptance in writing
Criteria agreed before build starts
Proposal in 48h
After a qualified scoping call
Change control
Scope, exclusions, and owners named