Skip to content
RETRIDGE
RAG & Enterprise AI Engineering

Your AI system should be an asset, not a liability.

We find out why RAG systems fail, then help engineering teams fix them. Retridge evaluates, secures, and builds production AI systems grounded in your organization's data.

50–100
real queries evaluated
2 weeks
to diagnosis
5 layers
retrieval · generation · data · security · cost
RAG pipeline trace demonstration
User query received
“What's the approval threshold for an expense over $5,000?”
Retrieval · k=4 4 chunks
expense-policy-2019-ARCHIVE.pdf 0.91
travel-reimbursement-faq.md 0.79
finance-onboarding-deck.pptx 0.74
expense-policy-2026.pdf #p12 0.71
Reranking top_n = 3
rank 1 ← archived duplicate · current policy dropped below cutoff (top_n=3)
Context window missing gold chunk
Generation grounded on stale context
Answer incorrect
“Expenses above $2,500 require director approval.” ← superseded 2019 figure
Retridge evaluation layer
Recall@3
0.62
Groundedness
0.41
Root cause
Rank
Failure identified RETRIEVAL RANKING · STALE DUPLICATE
01 / Why AI systems fail

Most AI pilots don't fail because the model isn't powerful enough.

They fail because the right information never gets retrieved, nobody defined what “good” means, the attack surface was never tested, and cost and latency were never measured. Four failure classes, four disciplines.

Retrieval

The system finds the wrong context.

Documents exist, but the right information never reaches the model. Chunking, embeddings, ranking, and metadata all quietly decide the answer.

Evaluation

Nobody knows what “good” means.

Teams test demos instead of measuring performance against real queries. Without a dataset, every release is a guess.

Security

The attack surface was ignored.

Prompt injection, data leakage, and permission failures appear after launch — usually in front of the people you least want to show them to.

Production

Costs and latency become unpredictable.

A convincing prototype becomes an unreliable production system. Token spend, p95 latency, and regressions arrive together.

02 / Flagship engagement

The RAG
System Audit.

Fixed scope Fixed price Evidence-driven Not a retainer

In two weeks, Retridge evaluates your AI system against 50–100 real user queries, classifies failures by root cause, analyzes reliability and cost, and delivers a prioritized remediation roadmap.

2
Weeks
50–100
Real queries
1
Prioritized roadmap
Request a RAG Audit Fixed price from $4,000
03 / Deliverables

What you receive

Nine artifacts, not a slide deck of opinions. Every finding traces back to a specific query, a specific chunk, and a specific measurement.

01
Executive assessment
Where the system stands, in language a board understands.
02
Query-level evaluation dataset
50–100 real queries with expected sources — yours to keep and re-run.
03
Failure classification
Every failure assigned a root cause, not a symptom.
04
Retrieval performance analysis
Recall@k, precision@k, ranking behavior, chunk and embedding quality.
05
Groundedness and answer-quality analysis
Faithfulness, completeness, citation accuracy, context utilization.
06
AI security findings
Prompt injection, leakage, access-boundary and tool-misuse probes.
07
Cost and latency analysis
Token spend, p50/p95 latency, cost per successful answer.
08
Prioritized remediation backlog
Ranked by user impact against engineering effort. Ready for your sprint board.
09
Technical walkthrough
A working session with your engineers, not a handover email.
RAG system evaluation Sample report
Scorecard
Retrieval accuracy 71%
Groundedness 83%
Answer completeness 64%
Security tests passed 89%
Failure distribution
Retrieval failure 42%
Generation failure 24%
Data quality 18%
Prompt / orchestration 10%
Security 6%
Demonstration data. Retridge does not publish client results without permission.
04 / Methodology

The Retridge RAG Reliability Model

Five layers. Every audit, build, and training program is scored against the same structure — so improvement is measurable across releases and comparable across systems.

01

Retrieval Quality

Recall Precision Ranking Chunk quality Embedding quality Query handling Metadata Hybrid retrieval
02

Grounded Generation

Faithfulness Completeness Citation accuracy Context utilization Hallucination behavior
03

Security

Prompt injection Data leakage Access-control bypass Unauthorized retrieval Tool misuse Adversarial behavior
04

Production Reliability

Latency Availability Observability Regression testing Failure handling Architecture
05

Economics

Token usage Retrieval cost Model cost Cost per request Cost per successful answer
05 / Technical scope

We diagnose the whole retrieval chain.

A bad answer is rarely the model's fault. It is usually a decision made six stages earlier — in a parser, a chunk boundary, or a metadata filter. So we instrument the entire chain.

Ingestion 01
Cleaning Parsing Metadata Document structure
Indexing 02
Chunk strategy Embeddings Metadata filters Vector indexing
Retrieval 03
Recall@K Precision@K Hybrid search Reranking Query expansion
Generation 04
Faithfulness Groundedness Completeness Citation accuracy
Security 05
Prompt injection Data exfiltration Access boundaries Tool misuse
Production 06
Latency Cost Regression evaluation Observability
07 / Method

We don't start with opinions. We start with evidence.

Four steps, run in the same order every time. The output of each one is written down, so you can check our reasoning rather than take our word for it.

01

Discover

Understand the system, users, data, and failure symptoms. Read the architecture, not the pitch deck.

02

Measure

Run real user queries through structured evaluation. Retrieval and generation scored separately.

03

Diagnose

Trace failures to retrieval, generation, data, orchestration, security, or architecture.

04

Improve

Prioritize fixes by user impact, engineering effort, reliability, security, and cost.

Engagement Discovery call Fixed-scope proposal Audit Report Walkthrough Optional implementation How it works →
Train your team

Build the AI capability inside your organization.

Technical workshops for engineering and product teams covering RAG architecture, evaluation, AI security, failure diagnosis, and production readiness.

Format
1–2 day workshop
Audience
Engineering & product
Also
Half-day exec briefing
Delivery
Onsite or remote
08 / Engineering-led AI consulting
MIT xPRO

Certificate in RAG & Context Engineering: Designing and Building Production-Grade AI Systems.

Capstone: building and defending a full retrieval-augmented system end to end.

Evaluation-first

Every engagement begins with measurable behavior rather than opinions.

Security-aware

Accuracy is not enough if the system can leak data or be manipulated.

Production-focused

Latency, observability, reliability, architecture, and cost all matter.

Working environment
Python Vector databases Neo4j Rerankers Hybrid search Eval harnesses Tracing / observability Major LLM providers
Client reference

Reserved for a named client quote. Retridge publishes references only with written permission — nothing here is fabricated.

09 / Who this is for

Built for teams where AI has to actually work.

You're already running AI

Your assistant performs well in demos but fails unpredictably with real users. “It hallucinates.” “It can't find the right documents.” “We don't trust it enough to launch.”

CTO · Head of Engineering

You're preparing to launch

You're planning a first AI-on-our-data initiative and need evidence that retrieval, permissions, evaluation, and security are production-ready before it ships.

Product · Innovation lead

You're building internally

Your engineering team needs a repeatable RAG and evaluation discipline — not a one-off fix that decays after the next model upgrade.

Engineering manager

You're handling sensitive information

Your AI system operates over financial, legal, healthcare, operational, or proprietary business information, and needs a security assessment before launch.

Compliance-sensitive industries

Your AI system doesn't need more guesswork.

Let's find out what's actually wrong.

No sales pitch · 30 minutes · straight answer on whether an audit is worth it