Connections to existing systems
Scope is shaped heavily by the systems in which the agent must read, write or act. A standard Microsoft 365 connection is different from a combination of ERP, CRM and legacy software without a well-documented API.
The honest answer: the price of an AI Agent is determined by scope, the systems it must work in and the level of assurance you need — not by the model alone. The Automation Group makes those factors visible up front so you can make an informed decision at every phase.
A language-model licence is only one part. The real design work lies in connecting process, data, technology and accountability.
Scope is shaped heavily by the systems in which the agent must read, write or act. A standard Microsoft 365 connection is different from a combination of ERP, CRM and legacy software without a well-documented API.
An agent can only work reliably with sources that are findable, current and accessible. RAG, source citations, permissions and document clean-up often require more design work than the language model itself.
An agent that drafts a response needs different safeguards from one that executes actions independently. Greater autonomy calls for sharper decision rules, human-in-the-loop review, exception handling and control points.
GDPR, the EU AI Act, DLP, audit logging and internal security requirements shape the appropriate architecture. European hosting may be sufficient, or an isolated on-premise solution such as OpenClaw may be required.
Model selection by role, context engineering, prompt caching and a token budget per run determine recurring model costs. Read our white paper on token economics.
After launch, processes, data sources, models and user needs continue to change. Monitoring, evaluations, incident handling and controlled improvements therefore belong in the total cost of a dependable AI Agent.
The Automation Group works with fixed prices for each bounded phase and a go/no-go after every phase. Each decision is based on tangible evidence.
We discuss the process, users, intended action and the systems the agent needs to touch.
We examine data, integrations, risks, ownership and the desired level of autonomy.
We test the critical assumptions with a working application using representative data and scenarios.
We add security, monitoring, evaluations, handover and an operating process for responsible use.
The best route depends on the expertise already available, how clearly the question is defined and who will manage the system.
Suitable when your team can build and needs targeted expertise for architecture, integrations or review.
View model →A specialist works inside your organisation while knowledge transfer and senior guidance remain part of the engagement.
View model →For organisations that want to build Agentic AI expertise as permanent capacity and retain ownership.
View model →Practical answers about building, operating and managing an AI Agent.
Discover more about our approach and solutions.
Share the process you want to improve. We map systems, data, risks and management needs, then propose an appropriate first phase.