Skip to main content
ThinkscoopEngineering
EngagementsCapabilitiesWorkApproachNotesAboutStart a build
EngagementsCapabilitiesWorkApproachNotesAboutStart a build

Thinkscoop Engineering

Senior engineers, AI augmented. Not AI washed.

Engagements

  • AI MVP Sprint
  • AI Integration Pod
  • Agentic Workflow Build
  • Embedded AI Pod
  • All four, with prices

Capabilities

  • Retrieval and context
  • Evaluation and quality gates
  • Agent orchestration
  • Guardrails and escalation
  • Observability, cost and drift
  • Product and platform engineering

The practice

  • Engineering home
  • Delivered work
  • How we work
  • Engineering notes
  • About the practice
  • Questions we get asked
  • Start a build

Reach us

contact@thinkscoopinc.com

Other practices

  • Business Applications
  • Growth
  • Thinkscoop, the parent company

Legal

  • Privacy policy
  • Terms
  • Cookies
Thinkscoop Technologies LLPTeam based in India. Clients across the US, Australia and the UAE.
Engineering/Engagements/02

AI Integration Pod

AI features built into a product that already has customers, without destabilising the thing they are already paying for.

$60k to $120k8 to 12 weeks

Price

$60k to $120k

Duration

8 to 12 weeks

How it is priced

Time and materials against a fixed capacity, billed monthly. The range moves on how many surfaces of your product are touched and how much of your data layer has to be reshaped before retrieval is worth doing.

Who is on it

A delivery lead, senior engineers working inside your codebase and your review process, and an engineer on retrieval, evaluation and cost.

Written for

Series A to C SaaS companies adding AI to a product that already ships, where the risk is regression rather than novelty.

Why this engagement exists

Adding AI to a live product is a different job from building one. The constraints are your existing schema, your existing review process, your existing latency budget and a customer base that notices. We work inside your repository, behind your feature flags, against your CI, and the first thing we ship is usually the evaluation harness rather than the feature.

What is in scope

  • An audit of the surfaces where AI actually earns its place, and a written argument for the two or three that do rather than the ten that could
  • A labelled evaluation set per feature, built from your production data with your team, with agreed thresholds before implementation starts
  • Data and retrieval work: what gets indexed, how it is chunked and filtered, how permissions follow the document into the index
  • The features themselves, in your codebase, in your style, behind your flags, reviewed by your engineers
  • A model-agnostic seam so the provider is a configuration decision rather than a rewrite: one interface, one prompt registry, one place where a switch happens
  • Latency and cost budgets per feature, instrumented, with the numbers on a dashboard your team owns
  • Guardrails on the output path and a defined escalation to a human where confidence is low
  • Load, failure and fallback behaviour: what your product does when the provider is slow, rate limited, or down

What you hold at the end

  • Merged pull requests in your repository, reviewed by your team, with tests
  • The evaluation harness wired into your CI, so a prompt change is a pull request with a score attached
  • Dashboards for quality, latency and cost per feature, on your monitoring stack
  • A written architecture note covering the seams, the fallbacks and the failure modes
  • A knowledge transfer session per feature, recorded, with your engineers doing the last change themselves

What this is not

Stated here rather than discovered in month three. Anything on this list can be scoped separately, and we will say what it would take.

  • A rewrite of your platform. If the honest answer is that the data layer has to change first, we scope that separately rather than smuggling it in
  • Owning your on-call. We write the runbooks and we join incident reviews during the engagement, and rotation is the Embedded AI Pod
  • Model training or fine tuning as a default. We reach for it when evaluation shows prompting and retrieval have run out, and not before
  • Vendor negotiation on your behalf

How the work runs

S1

Scoping call and written brief

One call with the people who know the problem, then a written brief back to you within two working days: what we understood, what we think the hard part is, what is explicitly out of scope, and which of the four engagements fits. If none of them fits we say that instead of reshaping your problem to match a price list.

Output: A written brief and a named engagement, or an honest no
S2

Evaluation before implementation

Before any prompt is written we build a labelled set from your real examples with your domain experts, split by category, with a held back portion. The pass threshold goes in writing, with the consequence of missing it agreed at the same time. This is the week that makes every later argument about quality a number rather than an opinion.

Output: A labelled evaluation set, a harness, and an agreed threshold
S3

A thin slice, deployed

One path through the system, end to end, running in your cloud account, usually inside the second week. Not a prototype on a laptop. Deploying early is how integration risk, credential problems and data access surprises surface while there is still time to change the plan.

Output: A deployed slice on your infrastructure and a working pipeline
S4

Weekly build, demonstrated

Every week ends with a working demonstration against the evaluation set rather than a status document. You see the score, the failures, and what we are doing about them. Anything at risk is raised in the week it becomes at risk, not in the week it becomes a problem.

Output: Shipped increments, a score per week, and a visible risk list
S5

Hardening

Guardrails on the output path, escalation payloads, tracing, cost and latency instrumentation, alerts wired to people who can act, and runbooks for the two or three ways this specific system fails. Where the system can act, it shadow runs against live traffic before it is granted authority.

Output: Guardrails, dashboards, alerts, runbooks and shadow run results
S6

Handover, and then out

Your engineers make the last change while we are still there to watch. Repository, infrastructure as code, evaluation suite, documentation and access all sit with you, and none of it depends on an account we control. If you want us to stay, that is an Embedded AI Pod with its own scope, not a dependency we engineered into the build.

Output: Code, IP, docs, evaluation coverage and a team that can run it

Questions we get asked

Do you work in our repository or yours?

Yours. Branches, pull requests, your review rules, your CI. If your team cannot review what we wrote, we have built you a dependency instead of a feature.

How do you keep the AI work from slowing the rest of the roadmap?

Feature flags on everything, a separate deployment path where your architecture allows it, and evaluation gates in CI so a regression is caught by a machine rather than a customer. We also cap how much of your engineers' time we ask for and put that number in the scope, because the hidden cost of an integration is usually your team's attention.

What is a model-agnostic seam, concretely?

One interface in your codebase that every AI call goes through, prompts held as versioned artefacts rather than string literals scattered through the code, provider selection as configuration, and an evaluation harness that can run the same suite against more than one provider. Switching then costs a configuration change and an evaluation run rather than a quarter.

Can you work under our security review?

Yes. NDAs, background checked engineers, your access controls, your tenancy, and data flow documentation written for the reviewer rather than for us. Say early that a review is coming and we scope the paperwork into the plan instead of discovering it in week ten.

This is the right one if

  • You have paying customers and a roadmap commitment involving AI, and a team already at capacity
  • You tried a prototype internally, it demoed well, and it fell over on real accounts
  • You need the feature to be defensible in a customer security review, not just impressive in a webinar

Capabilities it leans on

  • Retrieval and context
  • Evaluation and quality gates
  • Observability, cost and drift
  • Product and platform engineering
Start a build

$engineering / the other three

If this is not the shape you need.

01AI MVP SprintOne AI product idea taken from a blank repository to something real users can use, in six weeks, on your cloud account.$25k to $40k · 6 weeks03Agentic Workflow BuildA multi step workflow that currently runs on people, rebuilt as a system that acts, checks itself, and hands off cleanly when it should not act.$150k to $300k · 12 to 16 weeks04Embedded AI PodA standing engineering capability inside your team, for the year after the build when the interesting problems start.$18k to $32k per month · Three month minimum, then rolling

Bring the task, the data and what has already been tried.

You get a written view of the problem within one working day, from an engineer, including the version where the answer is that this is not a build.

Start a build