Technology strategy · AI artifacts
A portfolio of 25 AI artifacts that turn the architecture, economics, governance, and adoption decisions behind enterprise AI into tools that actually run. Strategy you can open, pressure-test, and take into the boardroom.
Sudeep Lalka
Technology strategy · AI delivery
Inspect how I connect architecture, investment, governance, and people decisions. Each working artifact exposes its model, assumptions, and tradeoffs so you can evaluate the judgment behind it.
Five decisions. Inspectable evidence.
Open a case, change an assumption, and see why the recommendation holds or changes. The other 20 artifacts show the wider range.
Enterprise bank, MCP core + A2A
Recommendation at the supplied scenario
MCP + A2A
Runner-up: MCP. Lead: 0.26 points. Scores express model fit, not a probability of success.
Is multiagent worth the extra cost, or a party trick?
Which initiatives to kill, scale, or hold this quarter?
What's the payback, and how fragile is it?
Are the people ready, or just the model?
Find the right instrument
Search by the decision you need to make. Every artifact shows its execution mode and exposes its assumptions.
FRAME → DATA → BUILD(RAG) → DEPLOY → GOVERN & REALIZE, gated.
Open the instrumentScore faithfulness/citations/hallucination before trusting a RAG build.
Open the instrumentScore every guideline, resolve duplicates and stale versions, confirm topics, and measure the retrieval-quality effect of the cleanup, before Build ingests a single chunk.
Open the instrumentRisk tier a use case; map required guardrails.
Open the instrumentRetrain / reindex / rollback / rescope, triggered by the right signal, the loop back to Frame.
Open the instrumentExpose N internal systems via MCP vs bespoke integrations, the crossover.
Open the instrumentHow much to budget for the observability harness around agents.
Open the instrumentWhen multiagent's quality gain justifies its cost multiplier.
Open the instrumentWhere to place the validation gate before outputs hit systems of record.
Open the instrumentSet the cost fidelity dial per use case, not per platform.
Open the instrumentBuild vs buy on unit economics before architecture.
Open the instrumentThe number of producers and consumers picks the protocol.
Open the instrumentSet autonomy level per risk tier, not per enthusiasm.
Open the instrumentPortfolio kill/scale/hold via risk adjusted ROI thresholds.
Open the instrument3-year TCO across all three, with the flip condition.
Open the instrumentThe API vs self host crossover, driven by utilization assumptions.
Open the instrumentWeighted vendor pick + concentration/exit cost exposure.
Open the instrumentFund/defer on an NPV range, not a single point.
Open the instrumentScale / scale with conditions / hold the rollout.
Open the instrumentWho needs to hear what, from whom, before the meeting.
Open the instrumentHire / contract / upskill per gap, with date + cost impact.
Open the instrumentReport trajectory, not snapshot, surface the reported vs actual gap.
Open the instrumentRisk tier + required controls map (EU AI Act + finserv overlays).
Open the instrumentBuild/hire/partner pathway per role, with time to productive.
Open the instrumentBid / no bid as a portfolio decision (fit × win prob × capacity × margin).
Open the instrumentDeliverable estimate range + staffing + change control impact.
Open the instrumentOnboarding critical path + KT capture before senior roll off.
Open the instrumentWhat decision to force this week, framed per audience.
Open the instrumentPick the operating point from the cost curve (review cost vs fraud loss), not from the leaderboard metric.
Open the instrumentExpose an internal catalog via MCP: three tools, one server file, and the observable wire shape of each call.
Inspect the recorded evidenceLIVE means real browser computation; SIMULATED means an explicit decision model; RECORDED means captured execution. Scenario provenance appears inside each instrument.