Three days inside your business.Then the truth.
Three days on your floor, three days working out what we saw, and one change worth making first — arrived at by ranking everything else and telling you what we would skip.
Open source projects
Public on github.com/JIGGAI
AI plugins
Published on npm, free to install
AI plugin installs
66,018 to date, per npm
AI monthly plugin installs
2,811 in August 2026, per npm
Almost nobody starts from zero.
Most businesses that call us have already tried something. The problem is rarely the technology — it is that nothing decided which process was worth it.
We ran a pilot. It demoed well. Six months later nobody opens it.
It was scoped against a capability rather than a process, so there was never a test it could pass or fail.
Every vendor we talk to recommends the thing they happen to sell.
Fair. Ours is analysis — which is why the guide is written to be built by someone else.
We have a list of ideas and no way to rank them.
Ranking needs numbers from your floor, not from a framework. That is what the days on site produce.
The people who would use it were not asked, and now they will not touch it.
The most common cause of a dead deployment, and the cheapest one to avoid — by asking first.
We do not know what this should cost, so we have not started the conversation.
Reasonable. The call is free and ends with a written quote for the assessment; the report tells you the size of everything after it.
Analysis is cheap. Building the wrong thing is not.
Six days of analysis costs less than a quarter of engineering pointed at the wrong process — and it is the only way to find out which process that is.
Four steps, in order.
Each step produces something concrete. You can stop after any of them.
On-site baseline analysis
We come to your business and watch it work. Three days is what it takes for the second version of an answer to arrive — the first day you are told how it is supposed to work, and by the third you are shown how it actually does, including the spreadsheets, group chats and workarounds nobody documents.
- Workflow mapping across the departments that matter
- Interviews with the people closest to the work
- An inventory of the systems you already pay for
- Where time, rework, and handoff friction actually accumulate
Research and discovery
Three more days away from your building, spent on what we saw. We cost the work, model the alternatives, and test the shortlist against your own numbers — then narrow it to the one change worth making first. Anything that would be a bad fit gets written down as a bad fit.
- Opportunities ranked by hours saved, errors avoided, revenue unlocked
- Effort and risk estimated for each
- Explicit "do not automate this" list
- Narrowed to one recommendation, with the reasoning kept
Report + implementation guide
We present the one thing we would do first and the written report behind it: what to build, with what tools, and how to tell whether it worked. The rest of the ranking comes with it, so you can audit the choice rather than take it on trust. It is yours — build it in-house, hand it to another vendor, or shelve it.
- Written report of findings and recommendations
- Concrete implementation guide, not a slide deck
- Tooling choices with reasoning, so you can dissent
- Success measures defined before anything gets built
We build it — if you want
If you would rather not staff this yourself, we build from the same guide we just handed you. Same team, same tooling we use on our own products, billed by the hour against an estimate you agree first.
- Estimated from the guide you already have
- Billed hourly, in increments you can inspect and reverse
- Built with the agent tooling we run in production
- Stop whenever you want — you keep what is built
What the six days look like.
The most common question we get is not about AI. It is what these people will actually do in my building.
- Day 1Walk the floorWhoever is on shift
We start where the work happens, not in a meeting room. Nobody prepares anything, and the first day is mostly watching.
- Day 2Sit with the people doing itOps, admin, finance
Conversations with the roles that touch the work most, and a real task followed end to end — including the parts that happen in a group chat.
- Day 3Systems, then a read-backWhoever holds the logins
What you run, what talks to what, and where a person is currently the integration. We tell you what we saw before we leave, while it is still cheap to correct.
- Days 4–6Research and discoveryOur desks, not yours
Away from your building. We cost the work we watched, model the alternatives, and test the shortlist against your own numbers rather than a framework.
- +1 weekOne recommendationPresented in person
The single change worth making first, specified precisely enough to build — with the ranked analysis behind it and the list of what we would not automate.
What actually lands on your desk.
Not a slide deck. A document written to be handed to whoever builds it — including your own team.
One recommendation
The single change worth making first, specified precisely enough to build, with what it costs, what it returns, and what it breaks if we have it wrong.
The ranking behind it
Every candidate scored on impact and effort, with the hours behind each number shown rather than asserted — so you can check the choice rather than accept it.
The do-not-automate list
The work that should stay human, and why. Naming it is what makes the rest of the list worth trusting.
An implementation guide
Concrete enough that a competent developer can start on Monday — yours, whoever ends up building it.
We run our own agents in production.
Most firms recommending agentic AI have never had to keep an agent running past the demo. We ship two OpenClaw plugins used by real teams every day — so our recommendations carry the scars of maintaining them.
Opinionated, because we pay for it
We have already made the expensive mistakes on our own products. You get the conclusions without the tuition.
Reversible by default
Everything we recommend is git-tracked and reviewable. If a change makes things worse, you can see exactly what to undo.
No lock-in on the plan
The implementation guide is yours whether or not you hire us to build it. We would rather be chosen than depended upon.
Built for the people doing the work
Agents that nobody on the floor will use are worth nothing. We design around the humans who have to live with them.
What is it costing you now?
Three numbers you already half-know. Move them until they look like your business — it is the figure any quote has to be read against.
re-keying, chasing status, producing the same document again
on that work specifically, not their whole job
salary, tax, benefits, desk
A 75% capture rate. The other twenty-five per cent is judgement, exceptions, and not wanting to look greedy.
This is arithmetic, not a finding. It rests on three numbers you guessed. The assessment replaces all three with numbers we observed — and tells you which of those hours are actually worth automating.
See what a real finding looks like →Arithmetic on your own guesses, not a finding — what the number is and is not.
What booking one actually commits you to.
The assessment is quoted on the free call and fixed once agreed. What it depends on is how much of the operation we have to see — sites and systems, not headcount.
Quoted first
The free call ends with a written quote for the assessment. Nothing is booked, and nothing is billed, until you have that in front of you and have said yes to it.
Fixed, not estimated
What we quote for the assessment is what it costs. Six days is six days — if it turns out to be more work than we thought, that is our problem rather than an invoice you did not expect.
Nothing beyond the six days
The engagement ends when the report is presented. There is no monthly commitment attached to it and no obligation to build anything afterwards, with us or with anyone.
Credited if you build
If you go on to build with us, what you paid for the assessment comes off the first invoice. It is not conditional — the report is yours either way, and taking it elsewhere costs you nothing extra.
The assessment is the first rung. The starters, custom builds and the arrangement afterwards each stand on their own.
Who the six-day assessment is for.
This is about the standard assessment specifically. Bigger operations are not a no — they need more time and more planning than six days buys, so we scope and quote them separately.
- 5 to 50 people, where one person can still explain how the whole operation works
- Somewhere we can walk end to end in three days — floor, back office, and the systems in between
- Work that crosses more than one system, with nobody owning the seams
- Someone who can approve a change once it has been scoped
- 50 to 500+ people, or more than a couple of sites — six days would sample it, not map it
- Anything needing a phased plan across departments. That is a longer engagement, scoped and quoted separately, and worth asking about
- An internal team that has already mapped the processes. You need builders, not analysts
- You want a vendor shortlist rather than an analysis. We would be the wrong shape
The questions that come up every time.
Why three days on site rather than one?
Because on one day you are told how the operation is supposed to work. The version people actually run — the spreadsheet that shadows the system, the approval that happens by text — surfaces on the second and third, once nobody is performing for a visitor. A single day produces a plausible report, which is worse than none.
What happens in the three days we do not see?
The analysis. We cost the work we watched, model what replacing it would actually take, and test the shortlist against your numbers rather than against a framework. Writing it up honestly takes about as long as gathering it, and doing that on the drive home is how you get a recommendation nobody can act on.
One recommendation? We expected a list.
You get the list — every candidate, ranked, with the hours behind each number. But the list is the working, not the answer. Handing over eleven opportunities is a way of not deciding, and the thing that changes an operation is one change actually made. We tell you which one, and why it beat the others.
Is the assessment fee credited against the build?
Yes. If you go on to build with us, what you paid for the assessment comes off the first invoice. It is not conditional on doing so — the report and the implementation guide are yours either way, and taking them to your own team or another vendor costs you nothing extra.
What is fixed and what is hourly?
The assessment is fixed: quoted in writing before you commit, and it does not move afterwards. The starters are fixed too, agreed before we begin. Implementation is billed by the hour, because the scope is yours to change once you see the first increment and a fixed quote would only mean padding it to cover a change we actively want you to make. We estimate from the guide before starting, and tell you when the estimate moves rather than after.
How long before we see anything?
Six days of work, then the report within a week of the last one. A starter, if that is where it leads, is running two to five weeks after it is agreed. Implementation depends entirely on scope, which is agreed in writing before anything starts.
What if the answer is that AI isn’t worth it here?
Then that is the finding, and it goes in writing with the reasoning. It is a legitimate outcome, you keep the analysis, and you have spent six days of our attention to avoid spending considerably more of your own.
Book the three days.
Tell us what your operation looks like and we'll tell you whether it is worth walking. Our assistant will help you write the first message.
Free 30-minute call first · quoted in writing before anything is booked