An agent here is one workflow that runs without anyone opening a tab. Not a chatbot on your site, not a Zapier scenario with a model in the middle, and not a pilot that needs a second engagement to reach production.
Enriches every inbound lead, scores it against an ICP file the sales team edits themselves, and routes the hot ones into Slack. No-fit demos fell from about half of bookings to about a fifth.
Case studyRead the full buildParses each application, matches it against the open roles, and cards it into the right recruiter’s DM with a match summary attached. First response went from 38 hours to 4.
Case studyRead the full buildReads the invoice inbox, finds the approver, and posts to Slack with approve and reject buttons on the message. The $96 a month Bill.com tier was cancelled on day 14.
Case studyRead the full buildStefan H. · Founder, TalentbridgeThere was a senior backend guy one of our clients had been chasing for about six weeks. He came in through our own site on a Tuesday and I got to his CV the following Monday. He’d already accepted something else by then, which I only found out when I emailed him.
We’re usually back to candidates the same day now instead of two days later.
We map the workflow as it runs today and put the scope in writing before any code exists. You get a fixed quote against that document.
Code lands in your repository from the first commit and runs against your real data before handover. That is how the RevSync build surfaced that their ICP rules lived across three Notion pages contradicting each other.
Documentation, a walkthrough, and the API accounts in your name. The builds above ran 8 to 12 working days end to end.
If the workflow changes shape every quarter the agent is out of date before it earns back the build, and if the vendor’s compliance posture is the actual product, as with payroll or e-signature, you should keep buying it.
Quoted in writing against a fixed scope before anyone writes code. The builds published on this site landed between $3,400 and $14,500 depending on how many systems the workflow had to touch. What runs afterwards is the API bill rather than a licence: the OpsQuanta reporting agent costs roughly $67 a month against the $2,940 a year of dashboarding tools it replaced.
A working agent in your repository, deployed to your infrastructure, with the API accounts in your name and documentation your team can extend from. For us that means one workflow automated end to end rather than a platform subscription, and the scope is fixed in writing before any code is written.
Single-workflow agents start at $500 and multi-workflow systems start at $2,500, quoted against a fixed scope. The builds published on this site ran between $3,400 and $14,500. What you pay afterwards is the API bill rather than a licence, and the OpsQuanta reporting agent costs roughly $67 a month to run.
Most agents ship in 2 to 4 weeks. The published builds took 8 working days for RevSync’s inbound qualification agent, 10 for Talentbridge’s CV routing and 12 for the Slack invoice agent. A system replacing several tools at once takes longer, and the Stratify build ran 5 weeks across four modules.
Claude Code runs the reasoning steps and the rest is chosen per build, so a deterministic routing rule ends up as a rule file the client edits rather than a model call, and a scheduled job ends up on a cron in the client’s own repository. What you are buying is an agent that works on your data rather than a stack we happen to like.
You do. The repository, the deployment and the API accounts are yours, with no per-seat licensing and nothing to renew. Where it makes sense the code goes public on GitHub as well.
That is what the handover is for, and it has happened on the published builds. The OpsQuanta ops lead added churn cohort analysis and a cash-runway alert without us, and the Stratify engineers extended their system twice in eighteen months.