A year ago that took engineers and a quarter. Now it takes an afternoon.

So why does almost no team get much out of it? They bolt the agent onto the work they already do. Take a messy workflow, add AI on top, and now you have a messy workflow with AI on top.

The teams that win do the opposite. They see the work was shaped for people doing it by hand, and redesign it now that intelligence is cheap. That is the hard part. Not building the thing, choosing the one workflow worth rebuilding first, and getting your team to use it.

That choice is where I spend my time. I'm Ryan. For four years I was the first employee at a startup, seed to Series A, living inside the messy workflows this fixes. I'm an operator who learned to build, not an engineer who picked up some business on the side. That difference is the whole point. The question was never can we build it. It's should we.

So I made the first part free.

Run the AI Workflow Audit yourself, inside your own coding agent. No call, no form. It interviews you about one workflow that eats your week, then hands you a report you keep:

• what it looks like today
• where it breaks
• which parts AI should touch and which it should not
• what to build first
• how you'd know it worked

It diagnoses before it suggests. If your workflow isn't worth automating yet, it says so, and says why.

Best in Claude Code. Codex, Cursor, or plain chat work too. Paste this into your agent:

If it finds something worth building, I build it.

One workflow, about a month. Human review and evals built in, not bolted on. I stay in the loop after it ships, because the work isn't done until your team is using it. From £4,500. You only pay when there's something worth paying for.

One honest note.

This is v0. No case study yet, no logos, no chart that goes up. The audit is real and you can run it today. The first paid build is the next thing that happens here, not something I can point to. If you want the person figuring this out, close to the work, before it has a deck, that's the whole point.