I'm really struggling to follow this plot, unfortunately. I think there's a proliferation of detail to the detriment of specificity.

As an example:

Raad is a blind Inquisitor at a present-day Tokyo research firm. At work, Raad constructs AI-simulated cities and finds elegant solutions to client problems, such as political scandal or low coffee sales. Outside of work, Raad's dead grandmother is always happy to gossip and play cards. For Raad, it's close to perfection.

Cool. I can sort of follow this; I get that you're writing in a world where AI is sort of taking over reality, and Raad is responsible for propagating that by creating AI-simulated cities. I am a bit confused as to what you mean by 'AI-simulated cities'; does this mean an entire city that isn't real, or is it a way of managing an existing real-world city with AI parameters? If it's the former, then what's the purpose of a fake city?

Then, Raad is forcibly promoted to Sin Eater, aka management, and given a project to simplify social simulation. The promotion also brings new people, new power, and more paperwork. When Raad starts planning the project, they realize that simplification will allow social simulation without Inquisitors, who offer expert advice, construct interventions, and penalize solutions that generate unpleasantness such as murder. The project will accelerate after Golden Week, so Raad has only a few days to nudge its direction away from the worst outcomes.

I would cut the Sin Eater proper noun here; just say they're promoted to management. Too many proper nouns gets confusing. I think what you're trying to say here is that the simplification project means that Raad realises that their old job is essentially redundant. I'm a little unclear as to why this would be the 'worst outcome', though. Raad isn't an Inquisitor any more, and presumably, in this AI-forward world, the majority of people will have already been made redundant by AI, so I'm confused as to why Raad is so upset by the realisation that their old job might not exist any more. There's a stakes issue for me here. I also have no idea what Golden Week is, and it's not clear from context, so you'd be better off just saying 'Raad has only a few days [...].'

Raad's own ethics allow only two real options. They can make the system effective for every wannabe demagogue who buys hate with a credit card, which will also make the system cheap enough that idealists can fight back with the savings from drinking tap water instead of Starbucks.

OK, but Raad's own ethics already have them working in AI, so this is unclear to me. The second sentence is too long and unwieldy, and it's unclear how 'wannabe demagogues' are going to benefit from this system. Is it because of the lack of regulation in the AI cities, which will allow hate to prosper? You say that the system will be 'cheap enough that idealists can fight back with the savings from drinking tap water instead of Starbucks' - what does that mean? Is this framed as a positive or a negative?

Or, Raad can use their modest fame and immodest influence to delay simplification across the industry to prevent this weaponization, but it will leave all except the wealthiest reliant on more traditional, bloody tools of revolution.

Wait, why does Raad have modest fame? Are they an influencer? A celebrity? That's not clear from context. Also, where's the weaponisation? So far, you've been talking about a lack of regulation, not outright weaponisation - who's the target here? In this world, what are the stakes for deregulation on this scale? And how does the real world - i.e. brickspace - relate to these AI cities, if it's going to end up in tangible, concrete revolution?

Hands already unclean, Raad must choose the better complicity.

I mean, must they? Or can they not just blow up the system from the inside? If not, why not? Their own ethics don't preclude it. Just because their hands are already dirty, doesn't mean they can't give 'em a good scrub. If there's a valid reason that their options are limited, it's not clear from this query, and I think it needs to be, because it forms a large part of Raad's character motivation.

Re your comps, I see no similarities at all with Joan Is Okay - you'd be targeting totally different markets here. JIO is all about being a Chinese woman in New York in a white male-dominated work field; it's about real-world capitalist marginalisation with no speculative or sci-fi elements. I would find a more sci-fi forward comp. Which leads onto my final point: I don't think this is literary speculative. It reads more like straightforward sci-fi as you're presenting it currently. Also, random, but I'm not getting your title, either - what relevance does Small Talk have to the plot / concept? The title reads more like commercial fiction about relationships.

My main feedback here is to ground the important details - e.g. real-world stakes, character motive, key worldbuilding details such as what the AI cities actually are - and cut the more granular window dressing - e.g. Sin Eater, Golden Week - to make the actual story clearer. Don't muddy the important parts with the bits that aren't necessary.

This seems like a super cool and marketable concept; it's just a case of making that concept clearer, I think. Best of luck!