Define the input and output contracts
Identify supported source formats, required fields, references and export or receiving expectations. Agree how missing or unsupported material is represented.
FOR CTOs & TECHNICAL LEADERS
Build around your workflow.
Keep the foundation inspectable.
Define the inputs, interfaces and review boundaries around AI-assisted work. MCOS provides a reusable foundation and task-specific protocols; Sentinel adds separate claim-use controls where integrated and configured.
Consulting expertise + software engineering · Implementation and acceptance checks scoped to your requirement.
Make the interfaces explicit.
Keep the retained basis separate from the model runtime.
THE ARCHITECTURE / FOUR MCOS LAYERS
A reusable foundation.
A protocol for the work.
L1–L3 separate source handling, structured extraction and scoped agent analysis. L4 defines a task’s questions, rules, checks and qualified outputs.
MCOS / L1–L3 SHARED FOUNDATION
- L1
Source & context
Receive supported material and keep its source reference and supplied context available.
- L2
Structured evidence
Apply configured extraction rules to supported facts, operands, units and stated requirements.
- L3
Scoped agent analysis
Use an authorized view for interpretation and selected checks. Keep qualifications and unresolved questions distinct.
L4
TASK-SPECIFIC PROTOCOL
The application’s review and deliverable
Configure the supported domain questions, required evidence, output fields and acceptance checks.
ONE INPUT / FOUR DESIGN RESPONSIBILITIES
Follow the application path.
Inspect where the boundaries belong.
Use a fictional staffing excerpt to explore the foundation, proposed L4 deliverable, separate claim-use questions and receiving requirements.
ONE SUPPLIED EXCERPT / AN ILLUSTRATIVE APPLICATION PATHStatic walkthrough · No engine or model call
01 / CONFIGURE THE L1–L3 FOUNDATION
Preserve the input. Structure the operands. Scope the interpretation.
The architecture separates these responsibilities. Extraction rules and supported checks still need configuration for the actual input and task.
- L1
Keep the supplied account
Retain the excerpt with its fictional interview reference. The reference does not independently verify the statement.
- L2
Type the stated operands
Headcount: 11. Annual rate per person: about $54,000. Preserve currency, period and approximation.
- L3
Examine within the agreed scope
11 × 54,000 = 594,000. A proposed finding may suggest investigating the workflow; payroll and achievable savings remain open.
These fields are authored for the walkthrough. This page does not run extraction, invoke a model or verify source correspondence.
Conceptual technical walkthrough, not a deployed application or live enforcement demonstration. No engine, model, signature verifier or authorization service is called.
INTEGRATION / ACCEPTANCE / OPERATIONS
Define the implementation.
Test the supported path.
Architecture fit depends on the actual interfaces, sources, models and controls. Agree those boundaries before extending a workflow.
Test model and agent compatibility
Select compatible components for the task. A provider change needs checks of views, output contracts, tool behavior and the supported workflow; it is not an automatic substitution.
Specify review and enforcement
Identify the responsible reviewer and the consuming system. Agree which checks inform review, which controls block use and what establishes authority to proceed.
What would we agree and test for an integration?
- Interfaces
- Source adapters, field contracts, authentication boundaries, permissions and consuming-system behavior.
- Failure handling
- Missing inputs, unsupported fields, refusals, retries and how an incomplete result is surfaced.
- Verification scope
- Selected deterministic checks, required source companions, compatible receivers and expected failure cases.
- Operating conditions
- Expected volume, latency, hosting, retention and data-location requirements for the scoped implementation.
Requirements such as a particular hosting environment, data-residency boundary or offline operation need explicit design and acceptance. This page does not establish those deployment capabilities.
THE RETAINED WORK / THE SOFTWARE THAT RUNS IT
Agree what travels.
Agree what has to run.
Separate the record the customer retains from the proprietary runtime, source companions and software rights needed for the next use.
THE RETAINED BASIS
Keep the original run’s documented context.
Source references, selected operands, interpretation, qualifications and refusals can remain available within the supported record’s scope. Re-prompting a changed model is not a substitute for inspecting that record.
Explore operational sovereigntyEXECUTION & RIGHTS
Define the receiver and the contractual boundary.
Agree source access, check rules, export formats and rights to use generated materials or software. A retained export does not include the proprietary MCOS runtime or make arbitrary agents interchangeable.
Inspect the scoped receiving testWhat has been demonstrated—and what needs its own validation?
The research page describes a separate receiver recomputing a selected staffing product and rejecting altered copies in one synthetic case. Its recorded scope, required source companion and check rules matter. It does not establish universal model interchangeability, all protocol exports or arbitrary deployment environments.
Inspect the evidence and its limitsEXISTING APPLICATIONS / YOUR NEXT REQUIREMENT
Inspect a working example.
Scope what comes next.
Explore application-specific records and outputs, then define the changes and checks your requirement would need.
KNOWLEDGE CONTINUITY
Key Person Audit
Inspect the illustrative knowledge brief, graph output and the distinction between recorded coverage and demonstrated readiness.
Explore the KPA exampleSOURCE-TO-RECOMMENDATION REVIEW
Sales Intel
Follow a stated buyer need into a supported next move and inspect the application’s example export formats.
Explore the deal exampleA SCOPED BUILD
Your application
Agree the task, supported inputs, protocol, consumer behavior and receiving tests for a new workflow.
Discuss the architectureBRING ONE WORKFLOW OR TECHNICAL REQUIREMENT
Define the boundaries.
Make the handover testable.
Start with the source, application, responsible reviewer and the checks a scoped implementation would need.