Engagement formats
The right format depends on what is still uncertain.
LatentDrift works in three formats, each built around a different open question: whether the use case is worth pursuing, how the system should be designed, or how a critical workflow will behave under realistic conditions. Each format is an independent starting point, not part of a fixed sequence.
Engagement formats
The AI feasibility assessment clarifies whether a use case is worth pursuing and technically viable. It examines the target workflow, available data, user roles, permissions, latency, explanation needs and the failures that would matter most. The result shows what is missing, which part of the system matters and whether to proceed, narrow the scope or stop deliberately.
The architecture sprint resolves the key technical decisions for a well-defined use case. It covers roles and states, memory and data rules, permitted access, interfaces, checks and approvals. The result gives product, engineering and operations teams a shared basis for implementation.
The pilot implementation tests one critical part of the future system under realistic conditions, whether it sits in the agent workflow, the data and evidence layer, or real-time interaction. The interface and the end-to-end workflow are part of the test. Sources, states, metrics, failure paths and human approvals show how the approach behaves in the intended workflow.
Outcomes
Months later, teams should still understand why a decision was made and where its limits are. We record the assumptions, technical rules, representative tests and system runs that matter. This makes it clear what has been tested, what already works and what remains open.
The decision brief sets out who will use the system, what data it needs, which failures matter most and how a useful first deployment will be judged. It also records what explanations users, domain specialists and technical teams need. This makes clear what can already be decided and which questions still need testing.
The system design connects states, memory rules, access permissions and model routing with interface behavior and the points where people intervene. Logging, source links, review rules and reset paths are included. Teams can implement and test the architecture, then reassess it deliberately when models, data sources or interfaces change.
Representative tests, system runs and known failure cases show how mature the implementation is. Open decisions and operating notes distinguish what has been tested, what remains experimental and where domain, technical or regulatory questions are still open. Internal or external teams can continue from a clear baseline.
Pragmatism
Not every project needs more agents or a larger model. Sometimes a clearer workflow, a better data structure, a smaller model or conventional software is the better answer. An architecture should only be as complex as the decision or process requires. Additional components make sense when testing shows a clear practical or operational benefit.
Assess your use case
For an initial assessment, we only need a few details: the process, the types of data available, who will use the system and the failure that would matter most. Please do not send confidential or personal data.
Outline your use case