Search and answers over your own documents and data
We turn scattered documents, tickets, and records into sourced answers your team can act on, with permissions and review dates intact.
The answer your team needs already exists somewhere in your systems. Not finding it costs you exactly as much as never having written it down.
why you cannot find what you already know
Your organisation has answered this question before. The answer sits in a document, a closed ticket, or a thread nobody thought to save, written by someone who has since moved teams. Search hands back a list of files and leaves the actual work — reading, comparing, judging which version is current — to the person who least has time for it.
the questions this answers
- What is our current policy on this, and when was it last reviewed
- Have we handled a case like this before, and what did we decide then
- What did we commit to this customer in writing, and where does it say so
- Which of these two contradictory documents is the one still in force
answers instead of files
Nine results, four of them outdated, one behind a permission the reader does not have, and no indication which is current.
One answer, the passage it came from, the date it was last reviewed, and a visible gap where the source is thin.
permission and provenance
- Retrieval respects the permissions of the original system, so nothing leaks by being indexed
- Every answer carries the passage it came from and the date it was last reviewed
- Stale sources are visible as stale rather than quietly treated as current
- Questions the corpus cannot answer are recorded, because that list is what to write next
when this fits
People who know the answer exists still lose real time hunting for it every single week.
The material is thin, contradictory, or unapproved. Agreeing and writing it down has to come first.
what you get
- A working answer surface over the sources you named as authoritative
- Citations on every answer, showing the review date of the passage behind it
- A record of the questions your material could not answer, ready to write next
- The indexing pipeline and its configuration, documented and yours to run
the questions we cannot answer for you
We will not present a confident answer built on a source your organisation has not agreed is authoritative. Retrieval finds text quickly; it cannot decide which of two contradictory documents you stand behind.
what people ask before starting knowledge & data intelligence
Is this just retrieval bolted onto a chat box?
Retrieval is one layer. Which sources count as authoritative, how permissions carry through, how answers are shown, and how failures get fixed are what decide whether it is trusted.
Can it show where an answer came from?
Yes, and that is an acceptance requirement rather than a later enhancement. An answer without a source is a rumour with good formatting.
What about material most staff should not see?
Permissions are preserved along the whole retrieval path. Sensitive systems can be scoped, or left out entirely, on your instruction.
How much of our material do you need before this is useful?
One corpus that a team already treats as authoritative is enough to start. We would rather cover a narrow area properly than index everything shallowly.
Tell us which workflow is slow, and who does it today.