Problem
Legal intake is high-friction for callers and high-risk for firms when urgency, jurisdiction, conflict checks, and advice boundaries are handled inconsistently.
R&D case study
RoboReceptionist
Legal intake workflow that screens urgency, gathers structured information, and routes cases without inconsistent or unsafe responses.
At a glance
Delivery stage
R&D
Current state
Prototype
My role
Sole architect and backend engineer
What was built
Built as a guarded intake architecture. A deterministic policy engine enforces jurisdiction, emergency, conflict, and legal-advice constraints before an AI layer can respond. Validated outputs are persisted with transcripts and routed to intake specialists through notification workflows.
Result
Working prototype with policy-gated intake flow, jurisdiction detection, and conflict-check pipeline
How the system was structured
This section shows the operational logic behind the build, not just the user-facing surface.
Key system pieces
Policy engine gates every interaction before LLM output can be returned.
State-driven intake flow keeps conflict checks and urgency triage early.
Transcript persistence and notifications keep the system auditable.
Core constraint
Validation and safety boundary: every LLM response must pass through a deterministic policy engine before reaching callers
Stack
FastAPIPolicy EngineLLM ValidationSQLite / PostgresEmail Notifications
Proof status
This page separates what is already visible from what is still being prepared, so the proof layer can grow without pretending unfinished artifacts already exist.
Proof surfaces
Real artifacts stay visible. Missing artifacts are labeled directly so this page stays honest and ready for stronger proof later.
System Walkthrough
Available nowThe system walkthrough is currently grounded in the intake flow and the architecture shown on this page.
- Policy-gated intake flow shows where emergency, conflict, and jurisdiction checks happen.
- Validated-response boundary keeps unsafe or non-compliant output from reaching callers.
Architecture / Flow
Available nowThe architecture diagram on this page is the strongest current proof artifact for how the system is structured.
- Policy engine sits in front of the AI layer.
- Stateful intake flow keeps high-risk questions early.
- Persistence and notifications make the system auditable after each interaction.
Operational Surfaces
Available nowThis system has real operator-facing surfaces even at the prototype stage.
- Conflict and urgency checks drive routing outcomes.
- Transcript persistence supports later review.
- Notification workflows keep intake specialists in the loop.
Artifacts & Evidence
Available nowCurrent evidence is architectural and workflow-based rather than public-production proof.
- Architecture diagram on this page.
- Intake state flow supporting the policy boundary.
- Validation boundary definition showing how unsafe output is blocked.
Related case studies
More work at a similar delivery stage.
Active Build
Proof surface in progress
Architecture / Flow
The current architecture direction is already clear even though the full artifact set is not published yet.
R&DActive BuildApplied AI & Automation Systems
WeatherForge
Weather-triggered signal and routing system in active development to turn storm activity into usable operational input for StormIQ.
My Role
Sole architect and engineer building the system foundation
Outcome
System boundaries are defined for signal ingestion, normalization, territory relevance, and downstream routing; implementation is in progress
PythonFastAPIGeospatial ProcessingEvent Routing
Read case studyActive Build
Proof surface in progress
Architecture / Flow
The architecture direction is already concrete: stateful orchestration, controlled branches, and explicit review seams.
R&DActive BuildApplied AI & Automation Systems
DGM
Workflow orchestration layer in active development for managing state, decision flow, and human review inside StormIQ.
My Role
Sole architect and engineer building the orchestration layer
Outcome
Execution model is defined for graph-driven workflow state, validation boundaries, and human review seams; implementation is in progress
PythonFastAPIWorkflow GraphsQueue-backed Jobs
Read case study