The service lines below are six ways into the same practice. Underneath all of them is one job: getting a language model to do useful work on your data, repeatedly, in a way somebody can check. The differences between them are differences of shape — an agent that holds a role, a pipeline that runs unattended, an interface a customer touches — rather than differences of underlying craft.
That is why the split is by what you are buying rather than by technology. A retrieval system, a support agent and a lead-qualification workflow may share most of their code and all of their evaluation harness; they are separate pages because they are separate decisions, with different budgets, different owners and different ways of going wrong.
Four things are constant across every engagement, and they are the parts most likely to be missing when a project arrives here from somewhere else. Retrieval and citation, so an answer can be traced to the passage it came from. Evaluation that keeps running after launch, built from real examples of your task, because quality decays quietly. Observability, so a bad week is visible before a customer reports it. And an exit: the code is yours, the model is a swappable component, and nothing in the design assumes we are still here in a year.
What we do not do is sell a platform. There is no QQuantum runtime you have to keep paying for, and no architecture we prefer because we resell part of it. Model providers deprecate versions and change prices; a system that treats the model as a component survives that, and one built around a single vendor's quirks does not.