What we have built

General-purpose AI tools are easy to buy and hard to put to use. What makes a system usable is knowing the process it sits in. The systems and engagements below were built with fifteen years of that knowledge, and they are the clearest illustration we have of what the difference looks like in practice.

The Agentic Bid Stack

Five systems in production covering the bid lifecycle for rail suppliers, each doing a job a bid team recognises, and each handing its output — and its sources — to the next.

  1. Find — TenderSource, a live service monitoring EU rail and public transport tenders.

  2. Qualify and process — Tender OS reads the tender end to end, extracts requirements, flags risks and contradictions, and produces bid/no-bid signals.

  3. Draft — the Agentic Bid Builder turns the requirement set into first-draft content against the tender's own scoring scheme.

  4. Remember — Tender Wikipedia makes a supplier's institutional knowledge answerable under deadline.

  5. Comply — CRA agents draft Cyber Resilience Act conformity documentation, traced to source.

Hover or tap a system to see an example.

TenderSourceFeed · new this week
3 matches
  • Onboard signalling retrofit, 14 light-rail vehiclesVerkehrsbetriebe Talmark · deadline 14 Nov 2026 · est. € 18.5 Mmatches your profile
  • Depot maintenance framework, four yearsStadtbahn Weidental · deadline 28 Oct 2026 · est. € 6.2 Mmatches your profile
  • Passenger information displays, 62 stopsRegionalbahn Lindmark · deadline 5 Dec 2026 · est. € 3.9 Mmatches your profile
TenderSource feed on public tenders — fictional authorities and figures
Tender OSLight-rail onboard signalling retrofit — 14 vehicles
qualified
IDRequirement · sourceStatus
R-041Retrofit of onboard signalling on all 14 light-rail vehiclesITT Vol. 2 · §4.1compliant
R-042First retrofitted vehicle back in service within 14 months of awardITT Vol. 2 · §4.3partial
R-043Series retrofit completed for all vehicles within 26 months of awardITT Vol. 2 · §4.3.1 · p. 87compliant
R-044Fleet availability of at least 98.5 % during the retrofit periodAnnex C · §2 — also defined in ITT Vol. 2 · §6.2, differentlyopen
Tender OS on a public tender — client data never appears here
Agentic Bid BuilderCriterion B.2 · Retrofit programme and fleet availability
draft · for review
Draft answer

The retrofit is delivered in lots of two vehicles, so that no more than two are out of service at any time [Method statement · §2.1]. The first vehicle returns to service in month 15 and the series is completed within 26 months of award [ITT Vol. 2 · §4.3]; availability against the timetabled requirement is held at 98.6 % throughout the programme.

2 sourcesBid manager to confirm month 15 against R-042 before release.
The Agentic Bid Builder drafting against the tender's scoring scheme — fictional content
Tender WikipediaQuestion · bid team
answered · cited
QuestionWhat did we quote for depot tooling last time?
Answer

€ 412,000 in the Talmark light-rail bid and € 386,500 in the Weidental depot framework. Both included the wheel-lathe adapter set; neither included operator training.

  • Price schedule v3 · 12 Mar 2025
  • Commercial annex B · 30 Sep 2024
Tender Wikipedia answering from a fictional supplier's archive
CRA agentsConformity evidence · OBU-400 onboard unit
3 of 5 evidenced
Secure-by-default configurationProduct security guide · §3.2evidenced
Vulnerability handling processPSIRT policy v2.1 · §4evidenced
SBOM availabilityBuild manifest, release 4.3 — export pendingopen
CRA agents on a fictional product — see the full table below

Across these systems: 2,500+ pages of tender documentation processed, tenders in six or more countries, every requirement checked back against its source.

How the verification layer works →

Tap a number to open the example; tap again to close it.

  1. Find

    — TenderSource, a live service monitoring EU rail and public transport tenders.

    TenderSourceFeed · new this week
    3 matches
    • Onboard signalling retrofit, 14 light-rail vehiclesVerkehrsbetriebe Talmark · deadline 14 Nov 2026 · est. € 18.5 Mmatches your profile
    • Depot maintenance framework, four yearsStadtbahn Weidental · deadline 28 Oct 2026 · est. € 6.2 Mmatches your profile
    • Passenger information displays, 62 stopsRegionalbahn Lindmark · deadline 5 Dec 2026 · est. € 3.9 Mmatches your profile
    TenderSource feed on public tenders — fictional authorities and figures
  2. Qualify and process

    — Tender OS reads the tender end to end, extracts requirements, flags risks and contradictions, and produces bid/no-bid signals.

    Tender OSLight-rail onboard signalling retrofit — 14 vehicles
    qualified
    IDRequirement · sourceStatus
    R-041Retrofit of onboard signalling on all 14 light-rail vehiclesITT Vol. 2 · §4.1compliant
    R-042First retrofitted vehicle back in service within 14 months of awardITT Vol. 2 · §4.3partial
    R-043Series retrofit completed for all vehicles within 26 months of awardITT Vol. 2 · §4.3.1 · p. 87compliant
    R-044Fleet availability of at least 98.5 % during the retrofit periodAnnex C · §2 — also defined in ITT Vol. 2 · §6.2, differentlyopen
    Tender OS on a public tender — client data never appears here
  3. Draft

    — the Agentic Bid Builder turns the requirement set into first-draft content against the tender's own scoring scheme.

    Agentic Bid BuilderCriterion B.2 · Retrofit programme and fleet availability
    draft · for review
    Draft answer

    The retrofit is delivered in lots of two vehicles, so that no more than two are out of service at any time [Method statement · §2.1]. The first vehicle returns to service in month 15 and the series is completed within 26 months of award [ITT Vol. 2 · §4.3]; availability against the timetabled requirement is held at 98.6 % throughout the programme.

    2 sourcesBid manager to confirm month 15 against R-042 before release.
    The Agentic Bid Builder drafting against the tender's scoring scheme — fictional content
  4. Remember

    — Tender Wikipedia makes a supplier's institutional knowledge answerable under deadline.

    Tender WikipediaQuestion · bid team
    answered · cited
    QuestionWhat did we quote for depot tooling last time?
    Answer

    € 412,000 in the Talmark light-rail bid and € 386,500 in the Weidental depot framework. Both included the wheel-lathe adapter set; neither included operator training.

    • Price schedule v3 · 12 Mar 2025
    • Commercial annex B · 30 Sep 2024
    Tender Wikipedia answering from a fictional supplier's archive
  5. Comply

    — CRA agents draft Cyber Resilience Act conformity documentation, traced to source.

    CRA agentsConformity evidence · OBU-400 onboard unit
    3 of 5 evidenced
    Secure-by-default configurationProduct security guide · §3.2evidenced
    Vulnerability handling processPSIRT policy v2.1 · §4evidenced
    SBOM availabilityBuild manifest, release 4.3 — export pendingopen
    CRA agents on a fictional product — see the full table below

Across these systems: 2,500+ pages of tender documentation processed, tenders in six or more countries, every requirement checked back against its source.

How the verification layer works →

A bid managed with these tools

A Western European rail electronics supplier; a public tender; one bid manager working with the systems above. Within a day of publication the team had a complete overview — key points, red flags, contradictions between documents, questions for the authority — and penalty exposure across three regimes as a model the managing director could adjust. Within the first week: a spare-parts calculator derived from five hundred pages of technical documentation in under an hour.

Read the case →
Penalty exposureLight-rail onboard signalling retrofit — 14 vehicles
contract € 18.5 M
Regime · sourceYour planExposure
First vehicle back in service · € 30 k per week beyond month 14R-042 · ITT Vol. 2 · §4.3 · cap 5 %month 15€ 130 k
Series retrofit completed · € 45 k per week beyond month 26R-043 · ITT Vol. 2 · §4.3.1 · cap 7.5 %month 26€ 0
Fleet availability below 98.5 % · € 8 k per 0.1 pp per monthR-044 · Annex C · §2 · cap 4 % · definition open98.3 %€ 416 k
Total exposure at this planoverall cap 10 % · € 1.85 M
€ 546 k

Illustrative regimes and rates on the same fictional tender. Adjust the plan to see the exposure move.

CRA agentsConformity evidence · OBU-400 onboard unit
3 of 5 evidenced
Requirement · sourceStatus
Secure-by-default configurationProduct security guide · §3.2evidenced
Vulnerability handling processPSIRT policy v2.1 · §4evidenced
SBOM availabilityBuild manifest, release 4.3 — export pendingopen
Update mechanismFirmware update specification OBU-400 · §5.1 — reviewer note pendingin review
Logging of security eventsProduct security guide · §6.4evidenced
Every statement drafted by the agents cites the product document it came from; the reviewer signs each row.

Fictional product and documents. Requirements paraphrase the CRA's essential requirements.

Conformity documentation, drafted and traced

Suppliers of rail electronics face the Cyber Resilience Act with small teams and long product lists. We use agents to draft the conformity evidence from the product documentation, with every statement traced to its source, and a reviewer who has run OT-cybersecurity roadmaps for the same kind of company. The result is a documentation set the supplier can defend, produced in a fraction of the time.

Talk to us about CRA →

The architecture follows the material

The same systems and the same verification layer can run on your own hardware, in a hardened European cloud tenant, with a European or non-European model provider, or in a hybrid of them — sensitive material handled locally, the rest where the stronger models are. Which one fits is decided by the sensitivity of the material and by what your customers or auditors will accept, not by the tooling.

Where your data goes →

LocalOn your own hardware

Where it runs
On servers you own, inside your network
What leaves your network
Nothing
Training on your data
No; nothing reaches a third party
Models
Smaller, local models only
Good for
Organisations whose material may not leave the building, or that have a no-cloud policy

CloudHardened European cloud

Where it runs
In a dedicated EU tenant, hardened and operated with you
What leaves your network
Encrypted documents, to your EU tenant only
Training on your data
No; a private tenant, under a contract that excludes training
Models
Stronger models than local hardware
Good for
Suppliers and operators whose customers or auditors check their security, and who need stronger models than local hardware allows

HybridBoth, split by sensitivity

Where it runs
Sensitive material on your own hardware; the rest in your hardened EU tenant
What leaves your network
Encrypted, non-sensitive documents only, to your EU tenant
Training on your data
No; nothing reaches a third party, and the tenant contract excludes training
Models
Local models for sensitive material; stronger models in the tenant
Good for
Organisations with a mix of sensitivities that want one system and one verification layer across both

European and non-European model providers are covered on the trust page.

Which of these looks like your problem?

Thirty minutes by video is usually enough to tell.

Book a call