Your crew already reports everything. It just dies in the group chat.
We put an AI in your site chats that turns ordinary conversation into a tracked record — issues, materials, deliveries, RFIs — and chases whoever owes what. Your foremen keep chatting exactly the way they do now.
No new app for the field. No logins below the supervisory line.
Works in Bisaya, Tagalog and English — usually all three in one sentence.
Sir kulang yung delivery ng gravel kanina — 15 cu.m lang dumating sa 20.
Noted. Pakuhanan ng photo yung DR bago umalis yung truck.
Sent na po sir. Follow-up ko na rin sa supplier.
Gravel delivery short — 15 of 20 cu.m
“kulang yung delivery ng gravel kanina — 15 cu.m lang dumating sa 20”
VERBATIM · NOT PARAPHRASED
- OWNER
- Site Foreman
- AWAITING
- DR photo
Nobody typed this into a form.
The Problem
The group chat was never a system
It started as a fast way to reach the site. Three projects later it's where your project record goes to disappear.
Everything lands in General
One group, every trade, every topic. The message that actually mattered is forty messages up, buried under a photo of somebody's lunch.
You are the routing layer
Nothing moves unless you read it and repeat it to the right person. You're the owner, the project manager, and the message bus — and only one of those is your job.
Loose ends never announce themselves
A question nobody answered. A delivery nobody confirmed. A variation nobody costed. You find out it was open when it becomes a delay — not while it was still cheap.
Reports get written from memory
The daily report is retyped at 9pm from scrollback and recollection. That's a story about the day. It isn't evidence, and it won't hold up in a claim.
A delay you can't prove is a delay you absorb
You submitted the RFI. They took eleven days. Everyone remembers it differently, and the timestamps are somewhere in a chat nobody can search.
How It Works
The bridge between the office and the site
Every system before this one asked the field to change. Log in here, fill this form, update that status. It fails on week three, every time. So we didn't build a system for the field — we built a bridge to it.
They talk. Nothing changes.
Your site groups stay exactly where they are — one group per project, a topic per division. The AI reads. It doesn't reply, doesn't nag, and doesn't join the conversation.
The exchange becomes a record.
When a conversation finishes, it's written up as a minute — what was said, by whom, in their own words. Issues, material requests, deliveries and RFIs are pulled out as cards.
Your manager curates, he doesn't type.
New cards arrive as a short review list. Confirm, correct in plain language, or remove. What he confirms is the record — and nothing touching money or status moves without him.
The field
Telegram. No app, no licence, no training.
The bridge
Quotes verbatim. Never invents a number.
The office
The system of record. The chat never is.
Below the line, nobody needs an account. Above it, one person approves.
What It Tracks
The six things that actually worry you on site
Not a feature list. This is the shortlist contractors name when you ask what keeps costing them money.
01
Site issues
Raised the moment someone mentions it — with the remedy, the person who owns it, and who confirmed it was actually fixed.
02
Material requests
What was asked for, by whom, for which project. Nothing waits three days because the request was said out loud and never written down.
03
Purchase orders
Request through approval to issued PO, tracked as one chain — so you can answer "where is it" without calling three people.
04
Deliveries
Quantity, quality, who received it and when — with the photo attached to the record instead of buried a hundred messages up.
05
Variations
Caught the day they're discussed on site, not the month the billing doesn't reconcile. Scope creep you can price.
06
RFIs and RFAs
Every submission timestamped and every day of client silence counted. That's your extension-of-time evidence, building itself.
Same engine, different subject — daily site reports drafted from the day's tracked work, permit and insurance renewals, equipment maintenance, collections follow-up.
The Rules
Why it survives contact with a real job site
Most AI pilots die because the tool was trusted with things it shouldn't have been. These constraints are built in, and they're the reason the thing is still running.
The database is the record. Chat is only a view of it.
What appears in Telegram is posted from the registry, not stored in it. In a dispute you're reading a record, not scrolling a conversation.
It quotes. It never invents.
Specs, quantities and prices are copied word for word from what was actually said, or left blank. A number it can't verify gets dropped, not guessed — enforced in the code, not just asked of the AI.
It proposes. A human decides.
The AI raises cards; your project-in-charge confirms, corrects or removes them. Nothing touching money or status changes on its own.
One seat runs everything.
The bot writes on everyone's behalf. Your foremen, bodegero and subcontractors never need an account, a licence, or a training session.
It stops at the supervisory line.
The system reaches your project-in-charge and goes no further. We don't touch personal Messenger, and we don't turn your crew's phones into a monitoring device.
A muted bot is a dead bot.
Digests and rate limits, not a ping every four minutes. If people mute it in week two, nothing else on this page matters.
From the Pilot
Day one, on a live job site
This is a deployment in progress, not a finished case study. Here is exactly what the first day produced.
Live Pilot · Philippine Civil Works Contractor
Fifty messages in. Nothing lost.
A civil-works contractor — roughly 15 core staff plus 25 project-based crew — was running every site through a chat community that had collapsed into one General channel. We put the bridge on a single live project.
On the first day it minuted eight real conversations in mixed Bisaya, Tagalog and English, tracked every open loose end it was asked to surface, and stored every quantity exactly as the foreman said it. The crew did nothing differently.
Client anonymized at their request. Figures are from the first day of a live pilot, not a completed rollout.
14/14
open loose ends found and tracked
0
quotes dropped or paraphrased
< $1
per day to run, per active project
How to Start
Fix one thing first. Then build the rest.
We start with a single urgent problem — the one costing you most right now. If that week works, we install the operating system around it. If it doesn't, you've lost a week, not a quarter.
Step 01
7-Day Automation Sprint
One week · one problem · fixed scope
We take the single most expensive manual process you have and make it run without you. One week, one working system, live in the tools your team already uses.
- The one process costing you the most hours
- Built, tested, and running on your real data
- Documented so your team can operate it
- Yours to keep, whether or not we continue
Best for: “There's one thing here that's driving me crazy.”
Step 02
30-Day AIOS Install
One month · the operating system
If the sprint proves out, we install the layer around it — your context loaded, your tools connected, and the systems that actually run the work built on top.
- Full operations audit and blueprint
- Your context and business rules loaded
- Tools connected into one source of truth
- Dashboards and automations built
- Team trained, documented, handed over
Best for: “That worked. Do it across the business.”
The sprint isn't a trial or a discount — it's the smallest piece of real work that shows whether we should keep going. Nothing about the 30 days gets decided until the 7 are done.
Who this is for
Contractors running more than one active site, with a project-in-charge on staff who can approve what the system raises. If you're a two-man crew coordinating one job, this is more system than you need — and we'll tell you that on the call rather than sell it to you.
Hosting and running costs come to a few dollars a month per project. What you're paying for is the build and the people behind it, not software rent.
Straight Answers
The questions contractors actually ask
My crew won't use new software.
They won't have to. Nobody below your project-in-charge installs anything, logs into anything, or learns anything — they keep using the same chat groups on the same phones. The only person who sees a new screen is the manager, and what he does there is tick approvals.
They speak Bisaya and Tagalog, mixed with English.
That's the normal case, not the edge case. This was built on real mixed-language site chatter, and it keeps the crew's exact words alongside an English summary. Nobody has to report in a second language to be understood by the system.
Signal on our sites is unreliable.
Messages sync whenever the phone finds a connection, exactly the way your group chat already behaves. Nothing is lost because a foreman was in a dead spot at ten in the morning.
Does this replace our accounting system?
No, and we won't try. It stops at the operational record and hands off to whoever keeps your books. Trying to swallow accounting is how projects like this die.
We already have a developer and an existing system.
Then we build alongside them, in our own namespace, and we don't touch their work. If you have a project tool you're outgrowing, the bridge feeds it rather than fighting it.
What happens when the AI gets something wrong?
Your manager sees it before it becomes a record, and fixes it by replying in plain language. Corrections take seconds, and nothing unreviewed propagates into the registry.
How long before it's running?
The pilot goes live on one project in weeks, not quarters. What actually takes time is the evidence — a couple of weeks of real site conversation before anyone should be convinced it works.
Open your site group. Scroll back one week.
Count what was decided in there that never made it into a record. That number is what this fixes — and it's the only thing worth talking about on the call.
No slides. We look at how your sites actually communicate today.
Next Step
Start with a 20-minute call.
No pitch and no slides. We look at where your time is actually going and name the one process worth fixing first. If there isn’t one worth paying for, I’ll tell you that.