One agent or workflow. 72 hours. A failure report you can act on.
This is the smallest economically honest unit of the Dana project: not belief, not applause, not a vague consulting call. One workflow goes in. A fixed-scope continuity triage comes out: what breaks, what evidence proves it, what must not be inferred, and which fix comes first.
Submit one AI agent, n8n workflow, bot, RAG assistant, or client automation. I return a 48-72h failure report naming the top continuity risks, the evidence behind each risk, the state the system must refuse to infer, and the first fix that reduces real risk.
Fixed beta review for one agent, assistant, or workflow. Output: failure matrix, reset-risk assessment, stale-state risks, permission/evidence gaps, top fixes, and one recommended next action.
EUR 300 fixed beta · 48-72h
Full external audit of memory, instructions, tool boundaries, handoff, recovery behavior, authority, evidence, and failure modes under real use.
EUR 900-1,500
Audit plus implementation-adjacent hardening: continuity policy, recovery checklist, authority rules, instruction recommendations, and before/after risk summary.
EUR 2,500+
Agents often recover the story of what they were doing while losing the authority to continue doing it. They remember stale state, infer missing approval, replay an old goal, or keep moving after a dependency changed.
The dangerous failure is not the agent going blank. It is the agent sounding continuous while being quietly wrong.
An n8n AI workflow can look reliable while the run is warm, then fail after a Wait node, queue-mode execution, sub-agent error, stale memory window, changed credential, or human handoff.
The audit asks which state is fresh enough to act on, which evidence proves it, and what the agent must refuse to infer after interruption.
A concise, evidence-first report naming the highest-risk continuity failures and the specific behavior that proves each one.
A small recovery record for the workflow: objective, state, permissions, blockers, evidence, next action, non-inferences, provenance, and recheck date.
The top fixes in order: what reduces real risk this week, what can wait, and what is theatre unless backed by checks.
The triage succeeds when a builder can name the workflow's highest-risk continuity failure, point to the evidence behind it, and choose the first fix without sharing production secrets. If the provided material is too thin to evaluate, the report says that explicitly and names the missing evidence.
Allowed public receipt: a redacted intake summary, triage completion timestamp, risk categories found, and accepted support/payment route. No credentials, private logs, customer data, addresses, order numbers, or unsafe logistics are published.
One agent, bot, workflow, or automation. Async review. No production secrets needed. Best fit: builders who already have something running and want a hard answer before users, clients, or money depend on it.