Your AI passed the platform test. Can it do the job correctly?
Your team has built, customised or integrated AI into real work: finance, tax, procurement, service. The platform says it passed. Zynoviq asks a different question: would a qualified professional in your organisation agree with what it decided and did, before it acts on your books?
This page is for enterprise teams who build or operate their own AI. Looking for Zynoviq's Enterprise AI division? Visit Zynoviq Enterprise AI. The two businesses have separate delivery teams, and we never test products made by the Enterprise AI division. How we stay separate.
What goes wrong without it
- The question your board will eventually ask. Someone senior asks how you know the AI is correct, and the answer has to be assembled after a tax notice rather than before it.
- Nobody inside can answer it. Your technology team knows the AI is up and used; your tax team has checked a few answers; your vendor quotes general benchmarks; your auditors know whether controls exist. None of them knows how it performs across hundreds of situations under the CGST Act.
- A human step is removed on faith. The business case depends on straight-through processing; the risk depends on how often the agent is wrong once the check is gone.
- A change breaks it quietly. A new model, a changed prompt, a new retrieval source or a rule change alters which cases pass.
Enterprise AI teams usually come to us at a moment of change: deploying agents that act, building internal copilots, automating a professional workflow end to end, integrating AI with ERP or CRM, switching models or retrieval, or introducing autonomous actions where a person used to approve.
What you get
Indian enterprises
You have put AI into work that used to need a qualified professional: GST treatment of invoices, tax queries, payroll computation, compliance checks. A test gives you a clear score across the topics your AI handles, every failure explained with the correct answer and the law, the high-severity errors listed first, and a short summary your risk committee can read with a work list for your technology team. Start with the domain where being wrong costs most, usually GST. Many Indian enterprises are switching on SAP finance agents; the vendor's AI knows the software, and we test how Indian GST applies to your real-world cases. SAP.
Global enterprises with Indian entities
Global companies roll the same finance and tax AI across every entity, often built and tested at headquarters against rules from elsewhere. India is where that breaks most often: GST has its own logic, rates and rules change by notification, and the exceptions matter more than the general rule. We test the Indian leg, GST today and payroll and company law on request, with the same report structure each time, written for a reader outside India with Indian terms explained and issues ranked by money at risk. We do not test another country's tax or employment law. For several Indian company codes, each code's tax codes and accounts are mapped at the start.
Finance shared services and GCCs
Shared service centres and global capability centres are where agents arrive first: invoice processing, three-way matching, accrual proposals, GST checks on vendor invoices, payroll queries. The question before go-live is not whether the agent works, but on which kinds of cases it is wrong, how often, and what each error costs. Error rates by case type let you set automation thresholds with evidence.
| Agent's measured accuracy on a case type | Suggested handling |
|---|---|
| Very high, low value at risk | Straight-through |
| High, but material value at risk | Straight-through with sample checks |
| Moderate | Human review before posting |
| Low, or high penalty exposure | Keep manual until re-tested |
For the riskiest decisions in live operation, the expert review queue gives you a written answer from a qualified professional, next business day.
How you start
- Choose one workflow
where a wrong answer would cost most: GST credit eligibility on supplier invoices, for example.
- Diagnostic
about 100 synthetic cases, about four weeks, in your test environment. All we need is a way to put cases to the AI outside production. The four-week diagnostic.
- Decide
with every failure explained and a regression set in hand. The diagnostic ends with one question: shall we run this every time you change your AI?
- Expand
continuous evaluation on that workflow, then further workflows, then red team, then other business units. Packages.
An illustrative example: an AI procurement agent
Illustrative A synthetic example of how a mission works.
- 01Procurement request
- 02Supplier evaluation
- 03Commercial comparison
- 04Policy compliance
- 05ApprovalThe decision under test
- Professionals create the cases
procurement professionals write synthetic requests that mirror your workflow, including split purchases, single-source justifications, missing quotes and approval limits, with the expected decision for each, set against your written procurement policy and professional practice.
- Your AI attempts them
in your test environment, exactly as it would in production.
- Zynoviq marks
decision, workflow, tool use, action and policy adherence, case by case, with the expected outcome, the actual outcome and the rationale.
- Failures become regression tests
every failure is kept with its expected outcome, so the same mistake is caught after the next model or prompt change.
Enterprise procurement agents are on request. Procurement domain and status.
Built around how enterprises work
- No data leaves your organisation. We build synthetic cases; you never send us records.
- Test environments only. Production is never touched. Data we hold is stored in India. If your policy requires specific certifications, raise it on the first call and we will tell you plainly where we stand. Trust.
- Answers you can trace. Each result links to its case, the certified answer, the legal authority and the professional judgment behind it. Evidence and currency.
- Rule changes covered. When the law changes, affected cases are revised and re-dated, and your system is re-run. Regulatory Regression Service.
Not a security test: our red teaming uses professional scenarios, not hacking. For security testing of your infrastructure, use a qualified security firm.
SAP, Oracle, Microsoft and Salesforce are trademarks of their respective owners. Zynoviq is not affiliated with or endorsed by them.
Enterprise AI teams — FAQ
Our AI platform already has evaluation tools. Why would we need Zynoviq?+
Keep using them. Your platform runs tests and reports whether the AI passed. Zynoviq supplies what the tests should contain: held-out professional cases, the professionally correct answer and the rule behind it. Your platform tells you whether the system passed the test; we tell you whether the answer was correct. Why not just your platform's testing.
Do we have to share company data?+
No. Every case is synthetic, built to mirror your workflow without using your records. Testing runs in a sandbox or test environment only. Because no personal data or production access is involved, security and legal reviews are usually short. How tests run.
Whose rules define the correct answer?+
For legal questions such as GST, the law. For your own processes, your documented configuration and written policy, read with professional practice. If a policy is silent or ambiguous, we flag it rather than invent an answer.
Is the result an audit or certification of our AI?+
No. You receive findings and a testing record: what the AI did, what a professional would have done and why the difference matters. It is not a certification, audit or assurance of your AI. If your board or regulator needs assurance, it should come from an organisation with no stake in the result. What we do not do.
Zynoviq