GTM automation that survives contact with production
GTM automation only compounds when the orchestration is deterministic: versioned pipelines, explicit QA gates, and humans approving what matters. That is what we build with Clay, n8n, and AI agents.
What deterministic orchestration means
Automation that behaves differently on every run is not automation, it is unpredictability with extra steps. Our Clay builds run 50+ column architectures with waterfall enrichment and cost-gated scoring, versioned so a change in one part of the pipeline does not silently break another.
Where the QA gates sit
Every automated step that touches an account, a message, or a send has an explicit gate before it, and a human approves anything expensive to get wrong, whether that is a large enrichment run or a message about to reach a real prospect.
Frequently asked questions
What tools do you build with?
Clay, n8n, and AI agents, wired together with explicit run conditions rather than automatic triggers everywhere.
How do you keep Clay costs under control?
Our Clay builds run 50+ column architectures with waterfall enrichment and cost-gated scoring, so expensive enrichment steps only run on accounts that already passed a cheaper qualification check.
What happens when something breaks?
Versioned pipelines make it possible to see exactly what changed and roll back, instead of guessing which of several connected tools caused the problem.
Do you build fully autonomous agents with no human step?
Not for anything that reaches a real account or a real inbox. QA gates sit in front of every consequential action.