AI Systems

AI agent development for production — real evals, real guardrails, real ROI.

AI agent development that actually ships. Novura Studios builds production-grade LLM pipelines, RAG systems, and agentic workflows for teams who've outgrown demos. Every engagement starts with the eval harness — because quality is the #1 reason agents stall before launch. LangGraph + Langfuse + pgvector + risk-based guardrails, integrated into your product surface, observable from day one.

  • What we build: RAG pipelines, agents, evals, guardrails — all four, integrated.
  • Our default stack: LangGraph, Langfuse, pgvector (Pinecone / Weaviate / Qdrant when scale demands).
  • Eval-first methodology: golden dataset and trajectory evals before a line of agent code.
  • Engagement model: custom-scoped, senior-only, end to end — sprint zero through production cutover.
  • Outcomes we track: eval score, cost per task, time to deploy, production drift.
The Production Gap

Why most AI projects don't make it to production.

The gap between demo and production isn't the model — it's everything around it.

A 2026 industry survey by LangChain found that 57% of organizations have AI agents in production, and quality is the number-one barrier for those still trying to get there. Demos pass; production fails. The gap between the two isn't the model — it's everything around it: the eval harness that catches regressions, the observability that makes drift detectable, the guardrails that block prompt injection, the cost controls that keep a per-task budget honest.

That “everything around it” is the work. Most consultancies still selling “LLM strategy” or “ChatGPT for your business” in 2026 are pitching 2024-era plays. We build what actually ships in 2026: agentic systems with traceable trajectories, eval-gated releases, risk-based guardrails, and provider-abstracted model layers so you can swap Anthropic for OpenAI when the math changes.

What We Build

Four pillars. One integrated system.

RAG, agents, evals, and guardrails — built together, gated together, shipped together.

Retrieval

RAG pipelines that retrieve the right context.

Hybrid retrieval (BM25 + dense embeddings + reranker), contextual chunking, and document-graph-aware retrieval where multi-hop questions matter. pgvector by default; Pinecone, Weaviate, or Qdrant when scale, latency, or multi-tenant isolation demands it. Embeddings via OpenAI, Voyage, or Cohere — selected by eval, not brand.

Agents

Agents that reason, plan, and call tools.

Production agents built on LangGraph with explicit state, ReAct and Plan-and-Execute patterns where each fits, and Model Context Protocol (MCP) for tool integration with your existing services. Human-in-the-loop checkpoints where stakes are high. Every decision logged as a trajectory, not a black box.

Evals

Eval harnesses that gate every release.

Golden datasets curated against your real production questions. Trajectory evals that test agent decisions, not just final outputs. Regression gates in CI so a model swap or prompt change can't silently degrade quality. Langfuse, LangSmith, Galileo, Maxim AI, or Arize Phoenix — chosen for your stack, instrumented from day one.

Guardrails

Guardrails that keep agents safe in the wild.

Layered defenses aligned to OWASP LLM Top 10 and NIST AI RMF: input sanitization, system-prompt isolation, policy-as-code for what the agent can and cannot do, output schema and factuality validation, and risk-based routing so heavy checks run only on high-stakes turns. Prompt injection isn't a checkbox — it's an architecture.

Our Default Stack

Opinionated and current.

Defaults exist so we ship fast; everything is replaceable when your constraints demand it.

Model providers
Anthropic Claude, OpenAI, Google Gemini — abstracted behind a provider layer so swaps are config, not refactor.
Orchestration
LangGraph for stateful agents; raw SDK calls when the surface is simple enough.
Retrieval
pgvector by default; Pinecone, Weaviate, or Qdrant when scale or multi-tenancy demands it.
Observability
Langfuse for traces and evals; Sentry for everything else.
Guardrails
Custom policy-as-code layer plus model-side safety; selectively augmented with Galileo or Maxim AI.
Hosting
Vercel, Cloudflare Workers, or AWS — whichever matches your latency and compliance posture.
How We Work

Eval-first, every step.

From golden dataset to production cutover — the bar is set in week one.

  1. Weeks 1–2

    Eval harness & golden dataset.

    Before any agent code. We work with your team to source real production queries, build a golden dataset, define the eval rubric, and stand up Langfuse / LangSmith. The release-gate bar is set here.

  2. Weeks 2–4

    Minimum-viable agent & observability.

    Smallest agent that solves the core path. Every turn traced, every retrieval logged, every model call costed. We tune retrieval and prompting against the eval harness, not intuition.

  3. Weeks 5–8

    Guardrails, cost tuning, production cutover.

    Risk-based guardrails layered in. Cost-per-task dialed against your unit economics. Cutover to production with rollback runbooks and drift monitors live before the first user sees it.

  4. Ongoing

    Drift monitoring, model swaps, iteration.

    Production AI degrades silently — model providers update, documents change, user queries evolve. We monitor drift, surface regressions before they ship, and run safe model swaps as the provider landscape moves.

What You Get

Owned code. Eval-gated. Observable from day one.

No black boxes, no vendor lock-in. The deliverables you keep when we leave.

  • Production code — owned by you, in your repo, from day one.
  • Eval harness in your CI — every PR gated by trajectory and unit evals.
  • Observability dashboards — traces, cost, latency, guardrail trips, eval drift.
  • Runbooks — rollback procedures, model swaps, prompt-injection incident response.
  • Cost guardrails — per-task and per-tenant budgets, with hard kill switches.
  • Knowledge transfer — paired sessions with your team so the system isn't a black box after we leave.
FAQ

Frequently asked questions.

What teams ask before scoping an AI engagement.

What's the difference between RAG and fine-tuning?
RAG injects fresh, factual context into a prompt at runtime by retrieving from your data; fine-tuning bakes patterns into model weights. For most production use cases — internal search, support assistants, knowledge agents — RAG is faster to ship, cheaper to maintain, and easier to keep accurate as data changes. Fine-tuning earns its keep when you need a specific tone, structured-output shape, or a smaller cheaper model that mimics a larger one.
How do you deploy an AI agent to production?
Production isn't a deployment step — it's an architecture. We start with an eval harness and a golden dataset before writing the agent. Then: minimum-viable agent, observability (Langfuse + Sentry), guardrails (input validation, prompt-injection defense, output policy), cost controls, cutover. Every stage is gated by eval scores, not feel.
What are AI agent guardrails?
Guardrails are the layered controls that keep an agent safe, accurate, and on-policy in production: input filters (prompt injection, PII redaction), policy-as-code (what the agent can and cannot do), output validation (schema, factuality, brand voice), and risk-based escalation to human review. In 2026 the bleeding edge is risk-based guardrail routing — applying heavier checks only to high-risk turns.
How much does it cost to build a RAG system?
Engagements are custom-quoted because the cost is dominated by your data shape, query volume, accuracy bar, and latency target — not the LLM itself. A typical scoped MVP (single domain, up to 100K documents, conversational interface) lands in an 8–10 week engagement. Long-running, multi-tenant systems with strict SLAs are scoped separately.
What's agentic RAG?
Agentic RAG replaces a single retrieve-then-generate pass with a multi-step loop: the model decides whether to retrieve, plans sub-queries, evaluates retrieved chunks, and may call tools mid-reasoning. It's slower per turn but dramatically more accurate on multi-hop questions. The trade-off matters most when answers must reason across multiple documents.
How do you evaluate an LLM application?
Three layers. Unit-level: does this prompt return the expected shape? Trajectory-level: does the agent's chain of decisions reach the correct outcome? Production-level: does live traffic match offline performance, and is drift detected fast enough to roll back? We instrument all three with Langfuse and LangSmith and gate releases on eval score deltas, not vibes.
How do you prevent prompt injection in production?
Defense in depth, because no single layer is sufficient. Input sanitization at the boundary, system-prompt isolation (instructions structurally separated from data), output validation against schema and policy, least-privilege tool permissions, and continuous monitoring for jailbreak signatures. We follow OWASP LLM Top 10 and NIST AI RMF as our minimum-viable security baseline.
Which model provider should we use — OpenAI, Anthropic, or Google?
Production-grade systems shouldn't be locked into one. We build with a provider abstraction so model swaps are a config change. Defaults: Anthropic Claude for reasoning-heavy agents and code-aware workflows; OpenAI for breadth and tool-calling maturity; Google Gemini for very long context windows and Google-stack integrations. Cost, latency, and eval score against your data — not brand — make the final call.
Related Services

AI rarely ships in isolation.

Pair this work with the services that surround it.

Ready to move an agent from prototype to production?

Tell us what you're building. Same business day reply with a scoped next step — not a generic sales pitch.