Applied enterprise RAG

Use AI to amplify meaningful work, not replace judgment.

Shakti is a small reference architecture for a serious idea. Retrieve only the evidence needed for one case. Treat it before a model sees it. Let AI explain, compare, or draft. Keep the sources, tools, and final decision visible to a person.

The Shakti case

1 buildingbecomes one bounded evidence packet4 City sourcesarrive with dates and processing receipts0 AI decisionsin address matching, counts, privacy, or the next step1 optional AI jobexplain the treated packet for human review

The reusable pattern

A case packet, not a data dump.

Enterprise RAG becomes useful when retrieval follows the work and its permissions. Shakti does not send a model every housing record. It builds one small packet around the building a person chose.

  1. 01Ask

    Name the person, task, and result that matters.

  2. 02Retrieve

    Use an approved key to fetch only relevant evidence.

  3. 03Treat

    Normalize, redact, cap, and attach source receipts.

  4. 04Amplify

    Let a model explain, compare, or draft within the packet.

  5. 05Review

    Return the work and evidence to a person who decides.

The boundary is the product

AI may help with the reading. It does not own the record.

AI may

  • explain a treated case in plain language
  • compare evidence and point to disagreements
  • draft questions, briefs, or follow-up notes
  • adapt a verified explanation for another audience
  • suggest missing evidence for a person to retrieve

AI may not

  • change source records or hide uncertainty
  • expand retrieval beyond the approved case
  • make eligibility, enforcement, or legal decisions
  • send, publish, file, or delete without review
  • turn a missing record into a confident answer

Meaningful applied use cases

The pattern travels. The boundaries change.

These are reference patterns, not finished Shakti features. Each one begins with a real task and ends with a person reviewing the work.

Public housing

Prepare one repair case

Retrieve: records tied to one building ID.

Amplify: explain the timeline and draft questions with citations.

Keep human: advocacy strategy, filing, and legal judgment.

Community services

Navigate verified resources

Retrieve: current program rules and official service pages.

Amplify: compare options and explain what documents may be needed.

Keep human: eligibility decisions and applications.

Public meetings

Trace a policy decision

Retrieve: agendas, minutes, votes, and named budget records.

Amplify: build a dated brief and surface unanswered questions.

Keep human: interpretation, public comment, and publication.

Field operations

Prepare an inspection visit

Retrieve: the assigned case, approved history, and current checklist.

Amplify: assemble the visit brief and flag conflicting evidence.

Keep human: findings, safety decisions, and enforcement.

Grant programs

Review evidence without losing the source

Retrieve: one application and the approved rubric.

Amplify: map submitted evidence to rubric questions.

Keep human: scoring, funding, and conflict review.

Internal knowledge

Answer policy questions with receipts

Retrieve: current, approved policies for the person's role.

Amplify: answer with exact sections and state when policies conflict.

Keep human: exceptions, discipline, and policy changes.

Local AI and traced tools

A model becomes useful when its tools are narrow and inspectable.

In the local research edition, Hermes receives the treated case packet. Its session is tagged, bounded to four turns, and separated from the public record lookup. The next engineering step is to relate each Hermes tool call to the Shakti trace without copying private content into the civic ledger.

Case packet readerSource receipt viewerTrace verifierBounded draft writer
Run the local research edition ↗
Hermes terminal interface running the Shakti local research edition
Real project capture. The public web edition does not include Hermes.

Before calling it enterprise RAG

Prove the whole loop.

  1. Retrieval: Can a reviewer see why every source entered the case?
  2. Permissions: Does the system enforce what this person and model may read?
  3. Treatment: Are private fields removed before model use?
  4. Receipts: Are source dates, tool calls, and stop reasons inspectable?
  5. Evaluation: Did known cases test missing, conflicting, and stale evidence?
  6. Review: Is the human decision explicit before anything changes outside the workspace?

Keep learning in public

Follow the next useful experiment.

The newsletter shares working demos, design choices, failures, and practical ways to apply AI to work that matters.

Join the newsletter ↗