Atlas · Workbench
Per-task automation feasibility, clearance type, dependency chain, and tool contrast (what we'd build vs what generic AI would do).
[{'name': 'Adaptive Differentiation Engine', 'description': 'Harvester ingests student assessment data (formative quizzes, prior grades, reading level, IEP goals) via school system connectors. Agent orchestrator generates personalized learning pathways—custom worksheets, video recommendations, scaffolded problems—for each student tier. Content production engine adapts difficulty, modality (text/video/audio), and pacing. Teacher approves pathway templates once; system generates individualized mat…[{'name': 'ChatGPT/Claude for Lesson Planning', 'description': "Teachers prompt an LLM to generate lesson outlines, discussion questions, or activity ideas. Vendor pitch: 'Save hours on lesson prep.' Reality: Teacher still writes the actual lesson, adapts it to their class, and validates pedagogical soundness.", 'automation_level': 'augment'}, {'name': 'Grading Assistant (e.g., Turnitin + AI)', 'description': "AI flags plagiarism and provides rubric-based scoring suggestions. Teacher reviews and…
Aggregate "X% of jobs automated" claims hide the granularity where displacement actually happens — at the task level within an occupation. The workbench surface lets you compare what daedarch would build (contract-gated, traceable, reusable) vs what a generic chatbot deployment would do (ad-hoc, untraceable, single-use). The contrast is what justifies the daedarch architecture.
POST /api/v4/execute
{ "tool_id": "daedarch.business.atlas_intelligence_v1",
"inputs": { "naics_code": "<6-digit>", "include_transformations_full": true } }
Returns tools_daedarch_builds[] + tools_generic_ai[] per scenario.