Case Study · Builder & Product Owner · 2026

Silas

An agentic sales-intelligence engine that finds where a payments platform is a genuine strategic fit — and scores every prospect by ecosystem leverage, not in isolation.

TL;DR

Sales teams burn time on prospects that look right but don't actually need the product. Silas is an agentic sales-intelligence engine I designed and built for my team at Equinox Payments. It maps the payments supply chain, validates real product-fit before it scores anything, ranks prospects on a five-dimension ecosystem-aware model, and outputs an interactive dashboard that explains the why behind every score. Built on Claude with a prospecting/enrichment data layer and a Python scoring engine.

01 Context

Payments distribution isn't a flat market — it's a supply chain. Decisions flow downhill: from the gateway, to the software vendor (ISV), to the sales organization (ISO), to the merchant. A merchant uses whatever their software supports; that software connects through whatever gateway it certified with. Leverage lives upstream.

A generic lead list ignores all of that. It treats a downstream reseller and the gateway that powers a thousand merchants as if they were the same size of opportunity. Silas was built to see the whole chain — and to prioritize where a single relationship unlocks an entire downstream base.

02 Problem

Two failure modes waste the most time in technical sales:

The bar Silas has to clear: surface prospects that genuinely need the product, ranked by where they sit in the supply chain — and explain, in plain language, why each one matters.

03 Approach & Process

Silas runs as a multi-step agentic workflow with a hard quality gate in the middle. Nothing gets scored until it has proven it actually needs what we sell.

StageWhat happens
1 · Understand the requestResolve target segment, vertical, geography, size, and volume — sensible defaults, then move.
2 · Validate need (quality gate)Website-keyword and technographic checks confirm a real product touchpoint. Non-fits are disqualified before any scoring effort is spent.
3 · Strategic researchFirmographics, technology stack, supply-chain relationships, growth and buying signals, decision-maker intelligence.
4 · Map the ecosystemWho supplies them, who they connect to, how many merchants/locations sit downstream — and an estimate of true opportunity size.
5 · Score & rankFive-dimension model → a priority tier and a specific recommended product for every prospect.
6 · Dashboard & outreachInteractive dashboard with the reasoning behind each score; outreach framing on request.

04 AI Integration

Claude is the reasoning engine. It interprets the request, runs the research and ecosystem mapping, applies the scoring logic, and writes the strategic rationale. A prospecting/enrichment data layer supplies firmographics, technographics, and verified contacts; a Python engine applies the scoring model deterministically and renders the dashboard.

The scoring model is the heart of it — 100 points across five dimensions:

Scores roll up into priority tiers, and each prospect gets a specific recommended product for its use case — so the output is a decision, not a spreadsheet.

05 Iteration

The design decisions that made Silas strategic rather than just fast:

DecisionOptions weighedCall & rationale
Where the quality gate goesScore everything, then filter · vs · validate need firstValidate first. Disqualifying false positives before scoring is what keeps the whole pipeline honest.
How to scoreProspect in isolation · vs · ecosystem-awareEcosystem-aware. One upstream relationship can be worth a whole downstream base — the model has to reward that.
Handling indirect playersScore them directly · vs · score by their upstream partnerScore by the partner behind them, and surface that partner as the real opportunity when it's the bigger prize.
Export behaviorAuto-export results · vs · human approvalNever auto-export. Always show a sample and the cost first, then wait for a person to say go.

06 Evaluation

An intelligence tool is only useful if you can trust it. The risks and the guardrails:

RiskMitigation
False-positive prospectsWebsite-keyword + technographic validation gate before scoring; competitors and non-fits auto-excluded
Missing or thin dataAbsent data never auto-disqualifies — it's flagged, not punished, to avoid throwing away real prospects
Over-trusting a numberSilas explains why a prospect scored the way it did; the salesperson makes the call
Drift over timeA structured feedback loop captures rep judgments to tune the model against real outcomes

07 Aspirational Impact & KPIs

What Silas is built to move:

5-dim
Ecosystem-aware scoring in place of a flat lead list
1 → many
Surface upstream deals that unlock a whole downstream base
Gate first
Validate genuine need before any scoring effort is spent

The outcomes I'd own at scale: less time on non-fits, a higher share of conversations with prospects who actually need the platform, and outreach that lands because it references something specific and true.

08 Key Learnings & Stewardship

If I scaled this: keep the validation gate ruthless, keep every score explainable, and let the feedback loop — not a static rubric — be what makes the model smarter over time.