You drew the line yourself: operational resilience is the upgrade from "can we recover?" to "can we continuously demonstrate we will not breach?" We bring that same upgrade to autonomous agents — a continuous, measurable resilience posture for what your first line is shipping, not a periodic test that's stale by the next release.
An independent, deterministic measure of where your agents drift from what they were commanded to do — a KRI your second line can put in the risk register and challenge with. The work moves to us.
In one sentence: we give your oversight function an independent, continuous number for whether an autonomous agent will breach — board-ready, automatable into your reporting, starting at a sprint you can expense. No new workstream on your plate; the work moves to us.
Your first line ships AI weekly; your second line has to challenge it without owning it. Today that challenge leans on periodic testing — validated in an exercise, stale by the next vendor release. Under OCC model-risk and the interagency resilience guidance, "we tested it once" isn't continuous posture, and the attestation stays open in your name. This research hands oversight an external, independent, continuous measure — so you challenge with a patented standard (US 19/637,714) you can cite in the register, not a judgment call. That's what turns "I made a call" into "I had it measured."
A board-ready report of where your agents can drift, what each drift would cost, ranked against your impact tolerance. You get this regardless of whether our model fits — it stands on its own as a risk-register artifact.
Whether our deterministic standard can convert that exposure into a priced, attributable number — bits and dollars. Fits → you hold the instrument. Doesn't → you've ruled it out for a fixed fee, with the map still in hand.
Every agent run produces a recomputable receipt: where the computation actually went, versus where it was commanded to go. The gap is the drift — and because the measure is deterministic, two parties replaying the same receipt land on the same number. That's what makes it a standard you can cite, not an opinion you have to trust. It's patented (US 19/637,714 · 36 claims · Track One). In the 15 minutes we run it live on an agent of yours — you watch the number form.
You've seen the AI-driven crisis scenarios — the wargame that makes a room feel the gap. We keep that format and change the payload: instead of "did your team respond," the scenario locates where your Trust Debt actually sits and what it's worth. A wargame that answers where is it — and prices it.
If you already run microsimulations or tabletop exercises, this is the measurement layer underneath them — it turns the theater of "we rehearsed it" into a located, attributable, priced liability you can put in front of a board. It plugs into the exercises you already run rather than replacing them.
Scope follows liability: you bound the engagement at the altitude of the posture you have to demonstrate. One agent proves the instrument; your estate is what your oversight program actually attests to. Three rungs — start where you like:
~1 week, fixed fee, card-payable. "Does the instrument find real drift in our environment?" The easy yes — not the board number, the proof that earns it.
30–45 days. Inventory the estate → rank by impact tolerance → deep-measure the top exposures → roll up the systemic Trust Debt → one board-ready, enterprise-wide resilience-posture assessment your oversight program can stand on. This is the engagement that matches your attestation — bounded by the org, not one agent.
The measure, run continuously and automated into your reporting — the difference between "we tested it" and "we continuously demonstrate it won't breach." Licensed once fit is proven. Operational resilience, not a point-in-time audit.
No remediation retainer, no staff-augmentation, no hourly creep. Remediation, if you want it, is a separate later decision — never bundled in to inflate the scope.
A full engagement at six figures will hit procurement and net-90. So we split it, and the first finding lands before procurement even opens:
The point isn't the payment hack — it's that you're measuring real agentic exposure in week one, not after procurement clears.
The sprint is an expense line. The org assessment is a rounding error against a single operational-risk loss event — or a model-risk finding that reopens every attestation you've signed. You're not buying a report; you're buying the difference between "we measured it before it breached" and explaining to a regulator why you didn't.
You name the one deployment that gives your team the most anxiety. We tell you exactly what the Pinpoint Sprint would find.
Book the 15 minutes →