Operational Intelligence

AI exposes
the mess.
It doesn't
create it.

Your workflows live in 15+ tools and your team's heads. Underpine makes them visible, scores the leaks, and produces machine-readable context so AI agents can actually work inside your company.

The problem

Sound familiar?

Every founder and ops leader we talk to describes the same three things.

01 — Scattered workflows

15 tools.
Nobody has
the full picture.

Becky creates a brief in one tool, copies it to another, assigns it, it gets worked on in a third, reviewed in a fourth. One workflow. Multiple tools. Three people. Zero integration. And don't get us wrong: people should do whatever tool they are more comfortable with — but you need to be able to overview all the work and outputs in a better way.

"We're using scattered, individual AI tools instead of a unified approach."
02 — Tribal knowledge trapped

Your best people hold what no system captures.

When to push back on scope. When to escalate. Which client needs hand-holding. This is the holy grail — and it's walking out the door with every resignation.

"Individuals hold institutional knowledge that isn't in any system."
03 — 40 things to fix, no idea where

You know AI could help.
But where?

You've identified dozens of workflows to fix. But without operational visibility, you're guessing. And guessing means wasted budget on the wrong things.

"We've identified 40+ capabilities to build — but no strategy for what to prioritize."
The solution

Three phases.
Full operational clarity.

We don't sell AI. We make your operations visible enough that AI can actually work.

01
Discover

Operational Mapping

We (or the AI? 🤖) interview your team and connect to your tools to map how work actually happens — not how the org chart says it should.

AI + human interviews
We'll connect to your tools (Slack, Notion, Adobe Workfront, HubSpot, etc.).
Capture tribal knowledge and undocumented decisions
Map the real workflows, not the intended ones
OutputLiving operational map for leadership — the full picture, finally.
02
Score & Prioritize

Strategic Intelligence

We score your operations against YOUR goals and show you exactly where the margin is leaking.

"This process drains X% of capacity. Here's why."
"Fixing this can impact Y% of your revenue goal."
Your top 3 out of 40+ — with full breakdown
Path A vs Path B: cost, ROI, and risk compared
OutputExecutive report — priorities, impact, roadmap. No guessing. No 47-slide decks.
03
Transform

Context Pack

We turn everything into structured context that any AI agents or AI solution can consume and act on. Not a PDF. Not a slide deck. A machine protocol ready to use and implement.

Format: Structured Markdown + YAML (optimal token efficiency)
Agent SOPs, decision trees, knowledge graphs
Prompt libraries, role definitions, workflow maps
Your company described in a language AI understands
OutputThe Context Pack — your Company Brain. Structured YAML + Markdown for AI agents.
04
Implement

AI solution planning

Your company now has everything it needs to start building AI solutions that actually work. Not sure which technical path to take? We’re here to help you plan the right one.

Translate the Context Pack into implementation priorities
Identify which AI agents or automations should come first
Define guardrails, owners, and review checkpoints
Turn the plan into a build-ready roadmap
Why this order

You can't automate
what you can't see.

Most companies skip straight to tools and fail. Underpine starts with visibility because the map has to exist before the territory can be improved.

  • AI on top of broken processes just breaks faster

    Without a map of how work actually flows, automation amplifies the dysfunction already there.

  • You need to know WHERE the leaks are first

    You can't fix what you can't measure. The operational map shows exactly where margin is disappearing.

  • Strategy before tools. Always.

    The Context Pack is only as good as the operational intelligence behind it. Get the intelligence first.

Process Visibility Strategic Clarity Machine- Readable Context Agent-Ready ✓ Week 1–2 Week 3–4 End of Week 4
What makes this different

Not a consulting deck.
Not another AI tool.

01

Interviews + Tool Data

We don't just ask how you work. We verify with real data from your actual tools — Slack patterns, Workfront throughput, HubSpot pipeline. We confirm, not just ask.

02

Revenue-Tied Insights

Every recommendation is tied to margin impact and goal progress. Not generic "AI opportunities." Quantified leaks. Specific ROI. Your numbers, not benchmarks.

03

Machine-Readable Output

The Context Pack isn't for humans to debate over. It's YAML + Markdown that AI agents can consume and act on. The only output in the market built for machines.

04

Weeks. Full Clarity.

Discovery to Context Pack in a couple weeks sprint. Not 6 months of workshops. Not 47-slide decks. Not transformation theater. Full operational clarity, delivered.

For agencies

Built for teams whose work lives between tools.

Underpine is for agency leaders who know delivery, approvals, and client context are leaking margin, but cannot see the full workflow clearly enough to fix it.

Join the waitlist

Tell us where work gets stuck. We will show you what needs to be mapped first.

Creative and marketing agencies

When briefs, revisions, approvals, and client notes are split across Notion, Slack, Figma, email, Workfront, and the account lead's memory.

  • Too many revision rounds
  • Unclear approval owners
  • Client context trapped in people
  • Margin loss hidden in handoffs

COOs and operators

When leadership needs a practical view of how work actually moves before adding another automation, AI agent, dashboard, or operating rule.

  • Workflow decisions based on anecdotes
  • No shared map of delivery risk
  • Tool data missing human judgment
  • Priorities competing for budget

Teams preparing for AI

When the goal is not another generic AI tool, but a context layer that teaches agents your real processes, owners, exceptions, and guardrails.

  • AI pilots feel disconnected
  • Prompts lack company context
  • Knowledge is not machine-readable
  • Automation risk is hard to govern
The output

See what you get.

Real deliverables. Not decks. Not vague recommendations.

Example — 28-person creative agency

This team creates ads, landing pages, email campaigns, and social content for clients. A simple request usually goes from brief, to first draft, to client feedback, to revisions, to final approval. That flow took 15 calendar days on average, but the team was only actively working for 7 of them. The other 8 days were spent waiting for feedback, clarifying conflicting comments, and chasing the right approver.

operational-map — creative-workflow — revision-analysis
Day 1 Day 5 Day 9 Day 11 Day 15 CREATIVE TEAM WAITING ON STAKEHOLDERS Brief 1d First Draft 3 days Notion · Figma Revisions 2 days Consolidating feedback Done Day 15 sent feedback sent approved 4 days idle Email Slack Doc comments no single source of truth 4 days idle Waiting on 3 approvers No deadline. No clear owner. Cue the Slack nudges. WHERE THE 15 DAYS GO 7 days — actual work 8 days — waiting on humans avg 3.4 revision rounds per project
executive-report — Scored Processes — Acme Agency
Current risk

Clients experience the delay, but leadership cannot see where it starts.

Work is not stuck because the creative team is slow. It is stuck because feedback arrives in different places, nobody owns the combined answer, and approvals do not have a clear deadline.

What needs to improve

Turn feedback and approval into one visible workflow.

The fix is not more reminders. The team needs one intake rule for feedback, one revision brief, one named approval owner, and a deadline that moves with every handoff.

Process area Risk today What to improve Impact Priority
Content revision loop
avg 3.4 rounds · 8 idle days/project
Projects slip because no one can tell whether feedback is complete. Create one consolidated revision brief before creative work restarts. $22K/mo 1st
Feedback fragmentation
Email + Slack + Docs — no single brief
Conflicting comments create extra revision rounds and client frustration. Choose one source of truth and flag conflicts before they hit the designer. $11K/mo 2nd
Approval routing
No clear owner · avg 4-day wait
Final delivery depends on whoever notices the approval request first. Route by project size, client type, and decision owner with a visible deadline. $8K risk/mo 3rd
+8 other workflows…
Full breakdown in report
varied varied Low–Med Later

Recommendation: fix the revision loop first because it is the biggest source of delay and the easiest place for AI to support humans safely.

Immediate work: define intake rules, consolidate feedback, assign approval owners, and measure the new cycle time before automating more of the process.
context-pack.yaml — Acme Agency / v1.0
README.mdPlain-English overview: how work moves, where it breaks, and who owns each decision.
workflows/content_delivery.mdStep-by-step process map with inputs, outputs, owners, tools, and common failure points.
rules/approval_routing.yamlMachine-readable rules for who approves what, by project size, client type, and risk.
risks/revision_loop.mdRisk register explaining delay, client impact, financial impact, and recommended fixes.
agents/feedback_brief_agent.yamlAgent instructions, guardrails, allowed actions, and required human review points.
# workflows/content_delivery.md Purpose: Turn a client request into approved creative work. Current problem: Feedback arrives across email, Slack, and document comments. Business risk: Extra revision rounds, missed launch dates, and margin loss. Process stages: 1. Brief received from client 2. First draft created by creative team 3. Client and internal reviewers leave comments 4. Account lead turns comments into one revision brief 5. Creative team revises 6. Named approver gives final approval Decision rules: - If comments conflict, stop and ask account lead to resolve before revisions. - If project value is above $10,000, creative director reviews before client delivery. - If feedback round is above 2, flag possible scope change to account lead. Agent-ready files: - rules/approval_routing.yaml - agents/feedback_brief_agent.yaml - prompts/revision_brief_template.md

The Context Pack is delivered as a Markdown/YAML library. Humans can read it as documentation. AI agents can use the same files as operating instructions, decision rules, prompts, and guardrails.

ai-agent-plan — content_delivery — 3 intervention points

What the agents handle

01
Brief validation
Before the first draft starts, an agent checks the brief against your brand standards and creative guidelines. Missing info and likely friction points get flagged before a pixel is pushed — fewer surprises in round 1.
02
Feedback consolidation
While the client reviews, an agent monitors Email, Slack, and Doc comments simultaneously. Creative receives one structured revision brief — not a scavenger hunt across three tools full of conflicting notes.
03
Approval routing
Based on project type and value (encoded in the Context Pack), an agent routes to the right approver with a deadline attached. 24h of silence triggers a nudge. No more chasing people on Slack hoping they saw the email.
Human review still happens — and it should. Every round counts. AI removes the in-between, not the judgment.

Same project. Fewer lost days.

Today — 15 days
7d work
8d waiting
With Underpine agents — ~8 days
7d work
1d
3.4 → 1.2× avg revision rounds per project
−7 days avg time-to-delivery
Another example
Example — finance ops team

This team receives about 320 vendor invoices every month: software bills, contractor bills, media spend, office expenses, and project costs. The finance software captures invoice amounts and due dates, but it does not know the human judgment behind exceptions: when a purchase order mismatch is harmless, when a missing contract needs follow-up, or who can approve a payment without creating risk.

finance-context-pack — invoice_approval — exception-routing
Day 1 Day 4 Day 8 Day 11 Invoice system Humans Exceptions Invoice intake Auto match Ready to pay Controller manual judgment Budget owner Slack approval Purchase order does not match invoice Missing contract work accepted already Main leak: invoice tools know data fields, but not the judgment finance uses to make a safe decision.
Current risk

Payment decisions depend on one controller's memory.

The systems know vendor names, invoice amounts, and due dates. They do not know which exceptions are safe, who owns the answer, or what evidence should be saved for audit.

What needs to improve

Separate routine invoices from real exceptions.

Finance needs clear rules for recurring vendors, purchase order mismatches, missing contract links, approval owners, escalation paths, and what an agent is never allowed to do.

Process area Risk today What to improve Impact Priority
Recurring vendor approvals
Staples, software, utilities
Low-risk invoices wait in the same line as unusual or risky invoices. Create safe approval rules for vendors that repeat every month. 4 days idle 01
Purchase order mismatch
Invoice does not match the original buying request
Valid invoices are held because the system cannot explain why the number or date changed. Attach campaign notes, owner comments, and risk level before finance reviews. $18K held 02
Approver routing
Department owner vs project owner
Invoices bounce between Slack, email, and Bill.com with no clear decision owner. Route each invoice by amount, department, project, vendor risk, and deadline. 38 hrs/mo 03

Recommendation: do not start by automating payment. Start by making the exception logic visible, consistent, and reviewable.

Immediate work: define routine-invoice rules, document exception types, assign approval owners, and require an audit note before any payment recommendation is made.
README.mdFinance workflow overview written for operators, finance, leadership, and technical teams.
workflows/invoice_approval.mdEvery step from invoice arrival to human approval, payment scheduling, and audit logging.
rules/approval_thresholds.yamlWho can approve which invoices, by amount, vendor type, department, and risk level.
exceptions/purchase_order_mismatch.mdPlain-English guide for when an invoice does not match the original purchase request.
agents/invoice_triage_agent.yamlAgent role, inputs, allowed actions, escalation rules, and payment guardrails.
# workflows/invoice_approval.md Purpose: Decide whether a vendor invoice is ready for human approval. Volume: 320 invoices per month Current risk: Exceptions depend on controller memory and Slack follow-up. Routine invoice rule: - Vendor is known and repeats monthly - Amount is below the department approval limit - Invoice matches contract or expected monthly spend - Agent may prepare approval summary, but may not release payment Exception types: - Purchase order mismatch: invoice does not match original buying request - Missing contract link: work was accepted but contract file is not attached - New vendor or bank detail change: always escalates to controller Required audit note: - What changed - Who confirmed it - Why payment is low, medium, or high risk - Which human gave final approval

This is not just a technical configuration file. It is a full process library: documentation, decision rules, risk notes, agent instructions, prompt templates, and guardrails that can be read by humans and used by AI systems.

With AI Agents: the missing finance judgment becomes executable context.

AI improvement is not "read the invoice faster." It is knowing the policy, the vendor history, the approval owner, and the safe next action before finance opens the ticket.

01
Invoice triage agent
Compares the invoice against the purchase order, contract, vendor history, and department approval rules. Clean recurring invoices move to the right approver automatically.
02
Exception explanation agent
Turns exceptions into a decision brief: what changed, who can resolve it, what evidence is missing, and whether payment risk is low, medium, or high.
03
Approval routing agent
Routes by amount, vendor type, project owner, and encoded controller rules. No agent releases payment without human approval.

Same invoices. Fewer dead zones.

11 -> 4 days average invoice cycle time after removing approval dead zones
62% of exceptions get a complete decision brief before finance opens the ticket
$38K monthly late-fee, duplicate-payment, and early-pay discount opportunity surfaced
Pricing

Transparent. No sales calls
to see pricing.

Diagnose
Free / $500
One-time · Self-serve or guided
  • 15-question operational score quiz
  • Automated score report
  • Wasted-hours estimate
  • Priority recommendations
Audit
$4,500 - $8,000
One-time · 2-week sprint
  • Full team interviews (AI + human)
  • Tool integrations — up to 7 sources
  • Living operational map
  • Scored executive report
  • Context Pack (YAML + Markdown)
  • 2-week delivery. Full clarity.
Join the waitlist
Scale
$1,500 /mo
Monthly · After Audit completion
  • Living map maintenance & updates
  • New workflow mapping (2/mo)
  • Context Pack updates for new agents
  • Monthly ops health report
  • Priority support channel
Join the waitlist

No hidden costs. Price depends on team size and tool count. Full breakdown shared after you join the waitlist.

2 wks

Average delivery: discovery to Context Pack

40+

Workflows mapped per engagement on average

3

Priority fixes that drive 60%+ of recoverable margin

$49K

Average recoverable margin found in pilot engagements

"We knew we were bleeding time and money — we just couldn't see where. Underpine gave us the map. Within a week we had our top 3 priorities and a concrete path forward."

JF
James Fletcher
CEO, Acme Agency

"The tribal knowledge capture alone was worth the entire engagement. Our AI agents went from generic to actually knowing how our company works. This is the holy grail."

ML
Marco Leal
COO · Pilot Cohort

Your operations are leaking
margin every day you don't look.

2-week delivery. Transparent pricing. No consulting theater.

Agent-ready in weeks, not quarters.

Tweaks
Hero Headline
Accent Color
Section Spacing