Why Does AI Fail When Integration Choice Is Unclear?
A paired direct-function and MCP test shows how to classify integration failures and assign repair ownership after a promising demo.
Topic collection
Choose between workflows, retrieval, models, tools, memory, and agents.
A paired direct-function and MCP test shows how to classify integration failures and assign repair ownership after a promising demo.
A reproducible MCP-versus-API test packet for permissions, traces, failure recovery, rollback, cost fields, ownership, and veto decisions.
A 60-run fixture shows why rolling context misses drift and where typed step contracts catch it before silent downstream corruption.
Use a dated two-track fixture to test whether a product engineer can run, explain, correct, and safely hand off an AI workflow without the author's context.
A three-case fixture shows why AI cannot safely choose between conflicting CRM, billing, and support records without authority and abstention rules.
A worked scorecard ranks manual review, human-approved AI assistance, and autonomous renewal-risk actioning before a pilot.
Use a 12-case evidence matrix to choose continue, rework, alternate path, approval, or stop for customer onboarding exceptions.
A reproducible 18-record workflow test shows what advisory, enforced, and exception-bearing policy revisions change in reachable actions and evidence.
Choose application code, a policy decision point, or a workflow by testing policy changes, stale approvals, ownership, and rollback before you migrate.
Use a worked owner and writer matrix plus five replay cases to expose state failures before an AI pilot receives real permissions.
A runnable state-ownership test for policy versioning, replay, projections, compensation, duplicate delivery, and conflicting writes.
A 28-case benchmark shows when exception branches create path and test debt, when a typed handler wins, and when recovery should escalate.
A hands-on practice guide for choosing shared or isolated tenant workflows, carrying tenant context, scoping state, and testing action boundaries.
A worked routing test shows when confidence thresholds justify review, redesign, or stopping after an AI prototype fails.
A reproducible one-owner experiment shows how to compare batch sizes by intervention catch rate, decision time, expiry, and attention cost.
A 35-case fixture shows when an AI workflow may continue and when it must retry, compensate, quarantine, escalate, or stop.
Set an AI autonomy boundary with a reliability-first scorecard before choosing a workflow, single agent, or multi-agent system for production.
A deterministic fault-injection test shows the first exception branch that breaks causal reconstruction, plus a trace rubric for deciding what to split.
Require a bounded workflow, trusted data path, safe action boundary, replayable traces, evaluation baseline, and named ownership before an AI pilot.
A five-case deterministic fixture shows when verified evidence fixes an AI workflow failure, and when the real fault is the contract, permission, or evaluator.
A component diagram can show an AI workflow and still hide who decides, approves, operates, evaluates, and repairs it. Use this before/after test.
An AI agent run contract names its goal, inputs, state, tools, permissions, stop rules, evidence of progress, escalation path, owner, and retained trace.
A worked boundary diagram, ownership worksheet, and seven contract tests for keeping AI workflows outside systems of record.
A reproducible four-case fixture shows why an AI prototype can pass its task while ownership, authority, or source-of-truth conflicts stop the workflow.
A filled worksheet for turning an AI feature's user interaction, approval, recovery, and concurrency needs into a request and status contract.
A worked decision-boundary map and fail-closed validator for deciding what an AI workflow may observe, propose, route, or execute.
A worked matrix for choosing RAG, workflow, single-agent, or multi-agent architecture when ownership, approval, and execution paths change.
A reproducible six-record test shows when typed extraction and policy-bound decisions justify an extra workflow stage.
A runnable fixture shows how an ownership switch turns stale retrieval into wrong AI answers, citations, and tool decisions.
A worked decision matrix and bypass test show when embedded checks stop being enough, and what the smallest passing policy architecture looks like.
A 32-case comparison shows when an AI workflow should prepare evidence, recommend an action, require approval, or execute within policy.
A 12-fixture change-set benchmark compares fixed workflows, single agents, and orchestration on regression, repair effort, latency, cost, and traces.
Use this six-decision matrix to explain an AI workflow's boundaries, trade-offs, owners, consequences, and verification evidence.
A provider-neutral action contract and failure matrix for deciding what an AI workflow may run, stage, approve, compensate, or block.
Architecture skill means defining the job, choosing workflow or agent, bounding authority, and testing the result with evidence.
Use a custom API for one embedded client. Extract MCP when independent model clients or a reusable platform create real reuse, with security vetoes.
A reproducible route benchmark on synthetic business questions shows where SQL, RAG, and a hybrid router each answer, cite, or abstain.
A six-task deterministic audit shows when one LLM call is enough, when a second owns a real contract, and what a model run must measure.
A worked matrix for deciding which AI workflow checks belong in deterministic code, model judgment, or a human decision gate.
A matched 40-job experiment shows when sync is cheaper and when async earns its queue, status, retry, and recovery complexity.
A bounded audit of seven gateway-latency claims explains what direct comparisons can prove, what mock tests hide, and how to run the next test.
A five-task deterministic audit shows when orthogonal tools stay harmless, when overlapping schemas create ambiguity, and how to test a real agent honestly.
A six-control matrix for deciding what belongs in model instructions, deterministic application logic, or a shared policy service.
A bounded fixture compares how much decision context human reviewers need across final-only, decision-summary, and expandable-trace surfaces.
A reproducible eight-case fixture shows how to preserve source authority, expose conflicts, and abstain when mixed-source evidence cannot establish current state.
A fixed ten-case replay shows how to test automatic routing against explicit rules and one capable path before adding another architecture layer.
A trace-backed routing matrix for choosing query-first, model-first, or fixed-route AI workflows when structured data is involved.
Use retrieval for approved knowledge, tools for live state, and both when one answer must join policy evidence to a current system result.
A 20-case harness compares embedded policy logic with a versioned policy layer across thresholds, exceptions, permissions, and approvals.
Use a workflow runtime, not the model, to own facts, writes, retries, approvals, and recovery. This matrix and fixture make the boundary testable.
Use a workflow scorecard to choose a local LLM, an API, or a hybrid pilot based on data boundaries, workload shape, quality, and ownership.
Design AI features that lose capability safely when models, data, or tools fail, with fallbacks, stop conditions, honest UX, and tests.
Choose structured outputs for typed model responses, function calling for executable capabilities, and both when a workflow crosses both boundaries.
Make an AI agent ask useful clarifying questions by defining a typed pause, blocking tools until the answer arrives, and testing when to proceed.
Build an AI agent design document around the job, boundaries, behavior, evidence, ownership, and release conditions before implementation.
A practical MCP server security guide covering OAuth audience checks, tool scope, sandboxing, prompt injection, SSRF, supply chain, and audit controls.
Design an AI agent state machine with explicit state, guarded transitions, safe side effects, persistence, recovery paths, and tests you can run before production.
A practical control plan for stopping malicious or stale content from becoming persistent AI-agent memory and shaping later tasks.
Choose RAG for grounded answers, a fixed workflow for known steps, and an agent only when evidence must change the next search or action.
Design multi-agent handoffs as bounded contracts for context, artifacts, authority, verification, and failure instead of passing loose transcripts between prompts.
A vendor-neutral schema for scoped AI-agent memory records, with promotion, retrieval, validation, expiry, and deletion rules.
Start with one AI agent when one coherent context can solve the task. Split only for real parallel work, hard permission boundaries, or measured limits.
A practical boundary for deciding what an AI agent should remember, recompute, reference, or forget between tasks.
Use five hard gates to decide whether a workflow needs an AI agent, a fixed LLM workflow, or ordinary automation before you spend money or grant access.