Tool shopping without a target
Vendors get evaluated before anyone has agreed which process is actually being changed — so every demo looks equally convincing and none of them can be compared.
AI Audit • Fixed Scope, 12 days
Know exactly where AI earns its place in your business.
Not a slide deck. Not a vendor list. A prioritised roadmap from the team that can also build it.
TIMEFRAME12 days Execution
PRICING MODELPriced per project
DISCOVERY CALLFree 30-min Call
DELIVERABLEEngineering Roadmap
FEASIBILITYStack-Verified
The real problem
AI projects rarely fail at the idea stage.
They fail in the gap between an idea and something a team can actually build. That gap is an engineering problem — and it is exactly where most audits stop.
Three good arguments, no framework
Different parts of the business each have a credible AI idea, and no shared way to weigh them against cost, risk, and whether they are buildable at all.
Budget approved, nothing shipped
The mandate exists and the funding is signed off, but nobody has turned it into sequenced work with estimates a team could start on Monday.
A roadmap nobody can build
A strategy document lands, engineering reads it, and the first honest question is whether any of it is possible in the current stack. That question should have come first.
What you get
Five deliverables, each one something you can act on.
The audit runs in sequence — each stage feeds the next, and the last one is written for the people who approve the budget.
Process & systems map
How the work runs today — the systems, the handoffs, and the data moving between them. A current-state architecture, not a summary of interviews.
- Current-state architecture
- System & data inventory
- Handoff map
Technical feasibility scoring
Every opportunity scored on whether it can be built in your stack, not only on whether it would be valuable. This is the part most audits leave out.
- Stack compatibility
- Data readiness
- Integration effort
Technical landscape scan
Where build, buy, and the tooling you already own genuinely differ for your case, with the trade-offs and the lock-in stated plainly.
- Build vs buy
- Model & vendor options
- Lock-in risk
Prioritised roadmap with engineering estimates
Sequenced work with estimates grounded in what implementation actually costs — because the team writing them is the team that would do the work.
- Sequenced phases
- Effort estimates
- Dependencies
Board-ready action plan
A short document leadership can decide against: what to do first, what it costs, what it changes, and what to stop doing.
- Decision summary
- Cost & timeline
- Success measures
Why Syscov
Most audits end where the hard part begins.
A roadmap is only worth the estimate behind it. Ours come from a team that ships production software.
Built by engineers, not strategists
The people scoring feasibility are the people who work across the whole stack every day — frontend through infrastructure.
See the stackScoped and quoted before it starts
Every audit is priced for the project in front of it. You get the scope and the figure up front, and neither moves once agreed — 12 days, then it is done.
The roadmap is buildable, because we can build it
Estimates come from implementation experience, and if you want it built, the same team can carry it through.
What we buildSecurity-aware from day one
Access, data handling, and auditability are considered while options are still on the table — not bolted on after a decision.
How we treat securityRepresentative work
The kind of systems the estimates come from.
A roadmap is only worth the engineering behind it. This is the weight of problem Syscov is used to — the constraints, not just the feature list.
01
Operations platform
Real-time dispatch across regions that disagreed with each other
An event-driven core owning jobs and vehicles as the single source of truth, demoting regional systems to adapters, and an offline-first driver app that reconciles when signal returns.
TypeScriptNode.jsPostgreSQLAWS
02
AI in a regulated workflow
Document intelligence that has to survive an audit months later
A retrieval pipeline over tenancy records, model output constrained to cited passages, human review at high-risk decisions, and an immutable trail of what was suggested and approved.
PythonVector storePostgreSQLModel APIs
03
Modernization
Replacing a core system with no cutover window and no spec
A zero-downtime strangler migration: production traffic mapped to a stable interface, with capability moved in dual-running slices reconciled against live production traffic.
Service interfacesPostgreSQLCI/CDObservability
04
Multi-tenant platform
Usage-based billing where every invoice has to be defensible
A multi-tenant core with per-tenant isolation, an append-only usage ledger the invoice is derived from, and adapters that fail independently without platform disruption.
TypeScriptPostgreSQLQueuesKubernetes
Client names and figures are published only with permission. These describe the shape and technical depth of work Syscov takes on, not named engagements.
How it works
Three steps, and you own the outcome at every one.
01
Discovery call
A free 30-minute conversation about where you are and whether an audit is the right next step. You leave with a scope and a price.
02
The audit
12 days of mapping, scoring, and sequencing, run with the people who actually know the work.
03
Decide, then build
You own the roadmap. Take it in-house, take it elsewhere, or have us build it.
Is this for you
It is worth saying plainly when this is not the right thing to buy.
A good fit if
- You have a mandate for AI and budget behind it, but no agreed starting point.
- The decision-makers are in the room — this works best with leadership involved.
- There is a real process with real data behind it, not a greenfield idea.
- You want an answer you can act on, including the option that AI is not the answer.
Not a fit if
- You are looking for a supplier to validate a decision that has already been made.
- There is no budget or mandate yet — a discovery call is more useful than an audit.
- You need a single tool implemented and already know exactly which one.
- You want a document for a funding round rather than a plan to execute.
Questions
What people ask before booking the call.
Clear answers on scoping, timelines, team commitment, and pricing before you get in touch.
The 30-minute discovery call is 100% free with zero obligation. Each audit is then custom-scoped and priced at a fixed, flat fee before work begins — guaranteed no hidden rates or drifting costs.
12 days from kick-off to the final action plan. We hold to that because the scope is agreed at the start rather than negotiated as we go — if something material turns up mid-audit we tell you, and you decide what happens to it.
Less than you would expect, but it cannot be zero. We need access to the people who actually run the process, plus whoever owns the systems and data. We work around your schedule and keep sessions short and specific.
A current-state map of your process and systems, feasibility-scored opportunities, a build-versus-buy read, a sequenced roadmap with engineering estimates, and a short action plan your leadership can decide against.
Usually more so. Existing tools become part of the current-state map, and a common outcome is getting more out of what you already pay for rather than adding another subscription.
Yes, and that is the point of an engineering-led audit — the estimates come from the team that would implement it. There is no obligation to continue with us, and the roadmap is yours either way.
A free 30-minute discovery call. We will tell you honestly whether an audit is worth doing for your situation, and we will say so if it is not. You come out of it with a scope and a price, and no obligation to go ahead.
