Interactive demos

Watch teams of AI agents think out loud.

Each demo puts a panel of AI agents to work on your input — deliberating live in a chat you can read and a console you can watch.

Step 1

Brief the panel

Use the one-click sample or bring your own material — text or PDF.

Step 2

Watch them work

Agents think, argue and converge live — as a conversation and an activity console.

Step 3

Take the deliverables

Every run ends in concrete outputs you can copy or download.

Filter
Hiring Panel run — six AI pros reaching consensus with an improved CV and cover letterLive demo
HHARIRHMPCCS
6 agents
~2 min

Hiring Panel

Six specialist agents deliberate to consensus — then rewrite your application

LangGraphMulti-agentConsensusPDF intake

Drop in a job description and CV. Six personas (headhunter, recruiters, hiring manager, coach, company scout) read in parallel, deliberate to consensus in a LangGraph state machine, then a document studio writes four deliverables concurrently. The pattern — parallel expert reads, moderated deliberation, structured output — is how you automate any multi-perspective review: bids, contracts, designs.

Improved CVCover letter — improved, or drafted if you don't have oneCompany intel briefAction plan
Launch demo
Research Agent run — planning, gathering evidence, reflecting on sufficiency, and answering with a limitations noteLive demo
PLSERDRFWRED
6 agents
~1-2 min

Research Agent

Plans its own web research, judges its own evidence, cites every claim

LangGraphTool useIterative retrieval

proves: iterative tool use · self-critique · transparent limitations

Ask a question. The agent plans search queries, fetches and reads real pages, then judges for itself whether the evidence is enough — retrying from a different angle when it isn't. Every claim is cited to a page it actually read, and a per-run limitations note says what it couldn't establish. That's the difference between "an LLM said so" and research you can put in front of a client.

Cited answerRun-specific limitations noteNumbered source list
Launch demo
Support Ticket Triage run — agents grounding a ticket in a knowledge base and pausing for human approvalLive demo
TWTRKLDRES
5 agents
~2 min

Support Ticket Triage

Automates the confident calls, pauses for a human on the risky one

LangGraphHuman-in-the-loopRAGGuardrails

proves: RAG grounding · confidence routing · human-in-the-loop

A pipeline splits an incoming support ticket, grounds each part in a live policy knowledge base, drafts replies, and routes by retrieval confidence: well-grounded parts auto-resolve, and the weakest part checkpoints the run with a real LangGraph interrupt() until you approve one of three options. This is the compliance-grade pattern for agents that act: autonomy where the evidence is strong, human sign-off where it isn't.

Resolved ticket threadAuto-resolved + human-approved branchesEscalation reasoning, kept visible
Launch demo
Ask My Docs run — retrieving passages from an ephemeral document store, grading them for relevance, and checking the answer for groundednessLive demo
IXRTGRWR
4 agents
~1-2 min

Ask My Docs

Answers from your document — and won't invent what isn't in it

LangGraphRAGGuardrails

proves: scoped RAG · corrective retrieval · groundedness guardrails

Attach a document and ask it questions. A corrective-RAG loop grades every retrieved passage before the writer sees it, rewrites the query when retrieval misses, then checks the finished answer for groundedness — regenerating anything unbacked. Nothing is retained: sessions self-destruct in 15 minutes and export as a portable file. These guardrails are what make an internal doc-bot safe enough to actually deploy.

Grounded answer with quoted passagesRun-specific limitations noteGuardrail check logPortable session file
Launch demo
Due-Diligence War Room run — a planner todo list, four parallel researcher sub-agents writing into a virtual filesystem, and a red-team gateLive demo
LDFIPMLRCORT
7 agents
~3 min

Due-Diligence War Room

A deep agent researches any real company — plan, sub-agents, red team, your call

LangGraphDeep agentParallel sub-agentsHuman-in-the-loopLive web

proves: planner todos · parallel isolated sub-agents · virtual-FS memory · red-team loop · interrupt() gate

Name a real company. A lead agent plans into a live todo list and spawns four researcher desks in parallel — isolated contexts, capped web budgets — writing findings into a shared virtual filesystem. A red team attacks the resulting thesis, you pick the deal stance at a real interrupt(), and a completion gate structurally verifies the memo before it ships. The same architecture runs any long-horizon knowledge job: due diligence, RFP responses, compliance reviews.

Final deal memo arguing your stanceRisk register — every objection and its dispositionThe full virtual filesystem (brief, findings, thesis, red-team file)Numbered web sources
Launch demo
AI Chess Arena — a dark 3D e-sports hall with three chessboards played by AI models and a live leaderboardLive demo
MMGEOACLDSGR
8 agents
always on

AI Chess Arena

A living benchmark: frontier AI models play each other at chess, nonstop — with every move verified

Multi-modelVerifier loopAlways-onThree.js

proves: constrained action space · verifier self-correction · live model benchmark

Which AI model actually reasons best under strict rules? Eight frontier models play continuous round-robin chess, and every move is validated against the legal set — illegal answers get caught, sent back, and corrected, with each model's error rate on the record. The ELO leaderboard builds from real results, the match history keeps the receipts, and the X-ray shows what every single decision cost in tokens. You can also challenge any model yourself and see how you measure up.

Live model-vs-model gamesELO leaderboardVerified moves with visible retries
Enter the arena