Entende o contexto
Lê a operação, o cliente e o histórico antes de propor qualquer coisa.
Vendas, marketing, atendimento, operação, financeiro e inteligência trabalhando sobre o mesmo contexto — para sua empresa ganhar escala sem perder controle.
Sua empresa inteira. Uma operação. IA trabalhando.
Para empresas de qualquer setor que querem crescer com estrutura, controle e inteligência.
Painel ilustrativo do Sistema Centriu com sete frentes trabalhando: atendimento, comercial, operação, agentes, inteligência, conteúdo e marketing. Cada frente mostra o trabalho concluído ou o próximo passo.
Representação ilustrativa do trabalho em execução
Não é falta de ferramenta. É que cada ferramenta resolve um pedaço, e ninguém é dono do todo. O custo disso não aparece numa fatura — aparece no mês seguinte.
Sistemas que não se falam
O mesmo dado é digitado de novo — e cada cópia conta uma história diferente.
Dados duplicados
Ninguém sabe qual versão é a verdadeira na hora de decidir.
Conversas perdidas
O cliente repete o contexto a cada canal e a cada pessoa.
Tarefas espalhadas
O trabalho vive em planilhas, mensagens e na memória de alguém.
Decisões sem contexto
A escolha é feita com o recorte que estava à mão, não com o que importava.
Automações desconectadas
Cada ferramenta automatiza um pedaço e ninguém enxerga o todo.
Nenhum desses problemas se resolve comprando mais um software. Eles se resolvem quando a operação inteira passa a trabalhar sobre o mesmo contexto.
A Centriu não é uma coleção de produtos. É uma plataforma em que clientes, áreas e agentes leem e escrevem no mesmo lugar.
Cliente 360
Um contexto, não vários cadastros
Cada conversa, tarefa, campanha, cobrança e decisão fica ligada ao cliente e à operação — não a um sistema isolado.
As áreas abaixo são partes da mesma operação, não produtos separados. Elas compartilham conta, permissões e histórico.
A inteligência artificial da Centriu participa da operação: entende contexto, prepara trabalho, executa rotinas e pede aprovação quando importa.
Lê a operação, o cliente e o histórico antes de propor qualquer coisa.
Redige, organiza, calcula e deixa pronto para revisão humana.
Roda o que é repetitivo dentro dos limites definidos pela empresa.
Cruza áreas, identifica prioridade e mostra o motivo da recomendação.
O que é sensível passa por uma pessoa antes de valer. Sem exceção silenciosa.
Registra o que aconteceu e usa o resultado para melhorar a próxima decisão.
Uma plataforma, várias frentes de trabalho. Tudo no mesmo contexto, com a IA participando do que dá para acelerar.
CRM, pipeline, oportunidades, propostas, follow-up e automações.
WhatsApp, Instagram, Messenger, chat do site e e-mail no mesmo contexto.
Tarefas, responsáveis, prazos, aprovações, agenda e capacidade.
Contas, cobranças, caixa, fiscal, margem, IR, orçamento e inteligência econômica.
Planejar, produzir, aprovar, publicar e medir conteúdo e campanhas.
Painéis, alertas, previsões, recomendações e leitura executiva.
Rotinas executadas continuamente pela IA com controle e aprovação.
Diagnóstico, estratégia, transformação, acompanhamento e especialistas.
A Centriu faz sentido quando o volume aumenta e a estrutura precisa acompanhar. Não é sobre setor nem tamanho: é sobre a operação conseguir sustentar o próximo estágio.
As vendas crescem, mas o processo não acompanha.
As áreas trabalham separadas e o cliente sente.
A operação depende de pessoas específicas.
O financeiro ficou complexo e o caixa perde visibilidade.
O atendimento cresce em volume e em canais.
A IA entra sem contexto, controle ou histórico.
Se a empresa ainda não começou a crescer, a Centriu também ajuda a preparar a estrutura para o primeiro salto.
Ver a Centriu funcionandoA Centriu combina tecnologia, inteligência, método e acompanhamento. A consultoria diagnostica, desenha, implanta e acompanha — com evidências, não com apresentação.
Diagnóstico e imersão na operação
Estratégia e prioridades
Roadmap de transformação
Desenho da arquitetura operacional
Implantação conduzida
Acompanhamento com evidências
Benchmarking e leitura de mercado
Especialistas, rede e inteligência coletiva
Uma conversa para entender onde a sua operação perde tempo, dinheiro ou capacidade — e o que a Centriu faria primeiro.
problema
Centriu Axiom's voice assistant, Sofia, used to build its approval card by hand, per action. It had a generic fallback that cut off at the first 6 fields without saying so. This meant a real, confirmed defect. A campaign's bid strategy, an email's subject line, a report's title, and one of two client-identifying fields could change on the real system. But the on-screen card never showed them. The fix gets every line of the approval card directly from the payload that is actually about to be sent. It expands nested objects field by field instead of putting them into one line. A function calls a test to confirm no key from the real payload is missing from what the person sees. That card sits behind a truly blocking approval gate. The tool handler is paused in a real Promise until a person clicks Approve or Reject. A 120-second timeout defaults to REJECTED rather than going forward. If there is no screen even mounted to show the card, the request fails closed right away instead of waiting or running anyway.

An approval step only means something if what the person reads on the card is actually what is about to happen. A card that summarizes an action in its own words, separately from the real request being built, can drift from that request. This happens the moment someone adds a new field to the operation and forgets to also update the card's hand-written description. The person still clicks "Approve." They still believe they know what they authorized. The gap between the two only surfaces later, if it surfaces at all.
An approval step only means something if what the person reads on the card is actually what is about to happen. A card that summarizes an action in its own words, separately from the real request being built, can drift from that request. This happens the moment someone adds a new field to the operation and forgets to also update the card's hand-written description. The person still clicks "Approve." They still believe they know what they authorized. The gap between the two only surfaces later, if it surfaces at all.
The fix is written directly in the code's own comment. It corrects a named, confirmed defect. The approval card used to be put together by hand for each action. A general summary path cut off at 6 fields with `.slice(0, 6)`. It did not say that anything was cut. In practice, this meant a Maestro campaign update showed its name, budget, and bid amount. But it did not show `bidStrategy`. This still went into the real request and changed the campaign's actual bidding strategy. A support-ticket email reply did not show its `subject`. Two report-generation actions did not show their `title`. A client notification showed only a client ID or a user ID, never both. Either could be the real recipient. Any general table write with 7 or more fields would show the first 6. It would run the rest without anyone seeing them.
The correction does not mean writing a better hand list. It means getting the card's lines from the payload that is actually about to be sent. `linhasDeConsentimento()` checks every key of the real, already-built request. A nested object opens into one line per inner field. This is specifically because, in the code's own words, a hidden change can hide inside what looks like a single harmless field. A value that is too long to show in full is made shorter. But the shortening always says exactly how much was cut. It never does so silently. The hand-written header a developer writes for an action ("Sends a REAL email to the client") still appears at the top. This is because it explains what an operation MEANS. It just no longer replaces the complete list.
A helper function, `chavesNaoExibidas()`, exists specifically to be called by a test. Given the real payload and the shown card lines, it returns every key that did not appear anywhere in what the person would see. That is the enforced rule. It is not a comment reminding a future developer to keep the card current. It is a check a test suite actually runs. When an action arrives under a capability ID the registry does not know, the system does not treat it as low-risk. This is because nothing is known about it yet. It is purposely put into the MOST dangerous class, high-impact-write. This needs approval. There is an clear note that an unknown capability can never become "low risk by omission."
Behind that card sits a real, blocking approval gate. The tool handler that wants to send an email, write to a table, or run a registered action calls a `request()` function. It is truly paused. It is not just told an approval is pending. It is paused inside a Promise that only finishes when a person clicks Approve or Reject on the shown card. This is confirmed connected to a real hook that watches for pending requests. It finishes them from actual UI interaction. A 120-second timeout with no response results in REJECTED, not approved. This is fail-closed, not fail-open. If no screen is even mounted to show a card (the panel closed, for instance), the request is rejected right away. It is not left waiting forever. Any requests still pending when that hook itself unmounts are also clearly rejected. So nothing is left in limbo.
Approval-card lines come directly from the real, fully-built outbound payload. They do not come from a hand-written description kept separate from the action itself.
Nested objects are shown field by field on the card. They are not put into a single line. This is specifically because a meaningful change can hide there.
A test-enforced rule (`chavesNaoExibidas`) returns any payload key missing from the shown card. This is a check a test suite runs, not a comment relying on memory.
Value shortening is announced, not silent. A long value is cut for easy reading. But the card always states how much was left out.
An unrecognized capability ID defaults to the highest risk class. It always needs approval. It is never treated as low-risk just because it is not classified.
A truly blocking, fail-closed approval gate is in place. A real Promise pauses the action. A timeout defaults to rejection. No mounted screen means immediate rejection instead of a silent wait.
Approving an action in Axiom now means approving what is actually about to happen, field by field. It is not a hand-written summary that can quietly fall behind the real request. A newly added field to any action is visible on the card automatically. This is because the card is made from the same payload the action sends. Nobody has to remember to update a second, separate description. The gate itself fails closed on both a timeout and a missing screen. So an action can never run simply because nobody happened to be looking.
Approving an action in Axiom now means approving what is actually about to happen, field by field. It is not a hand-written summary that can quietly fall behind the real request. A newly added field to any action is visible on the card automatically. This is because the card is made from the same payload the action sends. Nobody has to remember to update a second, separate description. The gate itself fails closed on both a timeout and a missing screen. So an action can never run simply because nobody happened to be looking.
Someone asks Sofia to update a Maestro campaign's daily budget. They also ask to switch its bid strategy at the same time. With the older hand-written card, only the budget and bid amount would have appeared. The strategy change would have gone through unseen. With the payload-derived card, `bidStrategy` appears as its own line. This is because it is a real key in the request about to be sent. Approving the card means approving exactly that change, not a partial description of it.

A hand-written approval card that left out real fields (a campaign's bid strategy, an email subject, a report title, one of two recipient IDs). Also, a general fallback that silently cut off at 6 fields on any write with more than that.
Every line comes directly from the real, fully-built outbound payload. It does not come from a separately kept description. A test specifically checks that no payload key is missing from what is shown.
A 120-second timeout defaults to REJECTED, not approved. The gate fails closed, not open.
The request is rejected right away. It is not left waiting forever.
The highest one, high-impact-write. This always needs approval. An unclassified action is never assumed to be low-risk.
It is sold by subscription with a published starting price. Exact current values are on the central pricing page.
Centriu Axiom's voice assistant, Sofia, used to build its approval card by hand, per action. It had a generic fallback that cut off at the first 6 fields without saying so. This meant a real, confirmed defect. A campaign's bid strategy, an email's subject line, a report's title, and one of two client-identifying fields could change on the real system. But the on-screen card never showed them. The fix gets every line of the approval card directly from the payload that is actually about to be sent. It expands nested objects field by field instead of putting them into one line. A function calls a test to confirm no key from the real payload is missing from what the person sees. That card sits behind a truly blocking approval gate. The tool handler is paused in a real Promise until a person clicks Approve or Reject. A 120-second timeout defaults to REJECTED rather than going forward. If there is no screen even mounted to show the card, the request fails closed right away instead of waiting or running anyway.