Problems this solves

  • Chatbots that forget earlier messages in a thread
  • Answers that aren't grounded in your own data
  • Free-form LLM output breaking downstream steps
  • No clear escalation path to a human

Proof

  • 6-node LangGraph Corrective RAG engine that answers 250+ question security reviews, with every answer required to cite a verified source
  • Autonomous AI email agent with thread-state memory and Groq inference
  • Planner-synthesizer research agent grounded in live web sources with citations
  • JSON-mode enforcement for schema-valid LLM output in production

What this covers

An AI agent is useful when it can hold context, use real data, call tools, and produce output other systems can act on. I build agents for operational work such as email screening, research, lead qualification, and infrastructure assessment.

How I design agents

Persistent context. Conversation or task state is stored outside the model (in a database, sheet, or document store) and loaded before each step. That is what lets an email agent keep a coherent thread across many replies.

Retrieval over verified data (RAG and CRAG). Answers are grounded in a defined source such as resume and portfolio data, live web results, policy documents in pgvector, or collected infrastructure evidence, rather than in the model's general knowledge. With Corrective RAG, retrieved passages are scored for relevance first, and weak retrievals are corrected before the model answers.

Structured outputs and validation. Where another system consumes the output, responses are constrained to a schema and checked before use.

Planner and synthesizer steps. For research tasks, one model breaks the question into searches, retrieval gathers sources, and a second step writes the answer with citations.

Critic and citation checks. For high-stakes answers, a separate critic step verifies that each answer cites a real source, such as an AWS ARN or a document section, and rejects it otherwise.

Error handling and escalation. Agents fail like any other integration. Failed calls are retried or logged, and cases the agent shouldn't handle alone are handed to a person with context.

Orchestration. n8n, Langflow, or LangGraph coordinate the steps, depending on how much custom logic is needed.

Relevant work

Common questions

What does AI agent QA include?

Testing the agent as a system: does it keep context across turns, does it answer from the intended source, does its output match the expected structure, what happens when a tool call fails, and does it escalate when it should. I test agents with the same methods I use for SaaS QA.

How do you test n8n AI agents before production?

Run realistic multi-turn conversations, feed malformed and edge-case inputs, force upstream failures (timeouts, rate limits, bad responses), and check both the output and the stored state after each run.

Technologies

Related case studies

AI Engineering Build

Multi-turn · Thread memory across replies

Autonomous AI Email Agent

A stateful n8n agent that reads incoming email, remembers the whole thread, answers from verified information, and drafts replies.

n8n · Gmail API · Groq · RAG · Google Sheets

AI Engineering Build

~90% · Reported cut in questionnaire turnaround

Autonomous Cloud Compliance & AI Auditing Engine

Collecting live AWS evidence, then answering enterprise security questionnaires with a LangGraph Corrective RAG agent that must cite a verified source for every answer.

LangGraph · LangChain · CRAG · LlamaIndex · Groq (Llama 3.1 8B)

More answers on the FAQ page.

Discuss a ai agent development project

Available for remote AI automation, n8n, AI agent, API integration, and B2B SaaS QA projects.