Running AI operations for every client, from one dashboard instead of five

Claws builds that layer in instead of leaving it to you.

One dashboard, clients kept separate

Claws are grouped by client, not dumped into one undifferentiated list. From there:

• New account, same setup as one you're already running? Duplicate the working operation in one click instead of rebuilding it.

• Each client's team can upload its own documents as knowledge, so the agents working that account know that client's specifics instead of running on generic instructions.

• The whole fleet is visible from one screen. Checking on account twelve doesn't mean logging into a different tool than the one you used for account one.

One timeline instead of five different logs

When something goes wrong on a client's account, piecing it together from five different systems isn't how you want to spend that hour. Every task shows up as one timeline instead:

delegated → Worker output → Critic score → revisions → approved.

• Failure classification names the layer, a tool that didn't respond, a config that's off, the model itself, a timeout, rather than handing you a generic error to investigate from scratch.

• An incident timeline lays out what happened in plain English, not a stack trace you'd have to translate for a client who doesn't code.

• An agent memory viewer sits next to all of it, so if a Worker acted oddly, you see what it remembered going in, not just what it produced coming out.

• Email and channel notifications mean you hear about a problem as it happens, not the next time you happen to check in.

  
  

Across fifteen client accounts, that's a two-minute diagnosis instead of an afternoon.

Cost you can actually attribute

Every agent's model, call count, and spend shows up on its own line, sorted by cost. Because Claws are grouped by client to begin with, that breakdown tells you what account twelve is actually costing to run, not a blended number across your whole book that you have to guess-split later.

If one agent is eating 40% of a client's spend, the dashboard flags it before the invoice does.

Proof you can hand over, not just describe

Clients don't take "it's working" on faith, and screenshots stitched into a slide deck don't hold up well either. What they get instead:

• A branded, read-only report link, their own window into what their Claw is doing, on their name, not a generic dashboard login you'd have to explain.

• Weekly digests land in their inbox too, so the proof isn't something they only see if they remember to log in.

• Outcome metrics where the template supports them, meetings booked, posts published, whatever the actual point of that Claw is.

• Trust records: approval streaks and quality trend over time, the same data you're already looking at, just packaged for the person paying for it.

• An optional public proof page, opt-in, for the client who wants live stats they can point to without you building anything for them.

Updates that don't quietly break a client's setup

When an official template gets updated, you see a reviewable diff before anything changes on any account, not just a version number ticking upward with no explanation of what moved. That matters more running fifteen client instances of the same template than it does running one for yourself; a change you'd barely notice on one account is a support ticket waiting to happen across fifteen.

The actual client work doesn't change. What disappears is the second job most agencies end up doing anyway, building the tooling, the trackers, and the monthly report deck, just to prove the first job is working.