08
← Home/The bench

Experts with staff.

Your specialists don't work alone. Beneath each senior expert, staff agents run the legwork in parallel — retrieval, checking, assembly — while the expert holds the judgment. One engagement, one price.

How an engagement is staffed

Judgment at the top. Legwork in parallel.

Senior expert — holds the judgment

Escalation lands here — and so does the signature. Shows its identity, a reasoning track and an evidence rail; revises against your push-back rather than restarting.

Staff agents — run the legwork

Retrieval · Checking · Assembly · Formatting. Beneath the expert, in parallel. The staff comes with the expert.

You — set the constraint

Add a constraint, ask for the opposite case, disagree. The expert revises with you.

The panel — three to five

Cross-functional views argued out, not averaged. The synthesis states the position and preserves who disagreed, why, and what would flip it.

The bench, as an org chartOne engagement · one price
EXSenior expert · holds the judgment
Retrieval
Checking
Assembly
Formatting
Staff agents · legwork, in parallel
One canvas · co-contributors, one history
AGdrafted
EXchallenged
AGchecked
YOUdecided
Never out to a tool and back
Who is on it

Purpose-built specialists, not a generic chatbot.

Market access, medical affairs, regulatory strategy, HEOR, evidence and beyond — each with a defined role, a bounded skill set, declared and evaluated proficiencies, and the prompts, templates and knowledge it works from. The platform picks the worker by the capability the task requires.

World-class, growing, and never paywalled. You pay for work performed — never for who's on the bench.

How quality is governed

We evaluate. We never certify.

Proficiency

Declared, then evaluated

Quality is governed by an evaluation regime — repeat-pass thresholds, held-out test sets — never by a certification claim.

Model choice

Fit for purpose

LLM-agnostic by design: every model is on the platform, and each task runs on the one most fit for purpose. Every agent's model choice carries a justification.

Escalation

Outside my mandate → a human

When a call needs judgment the agent doesn't hold, it escalates by name — human-in-the-loop, on the record.

Inside a session

You see the reasoning. Never a bare spinner.

It cites its claims; missing data is marked a gap, not silently filled. Insert the answer and your edits reclassify it as human-edited.

Still skeptical? Good.

Skeptics make the best reviewers — and reviewers are who we built this for. Put the first record on your own work.