One number, agreed in the room
A scope needs an indicator attached before the build starts. It tells us when to stop tuning, and lets the team say the agent is not working without it becoming an opinion.
A useful agent is not a prompt. It is a clear boundary, clean data, a test set, and supervision that does not stop at launch.
One workshop to fix the boundary, the expected value, and the single number that decides success. If we cannot find a clear trigger, one decision and an outcome somebody already tracks, we say the process is not ready.
Collection, cleanup, access rights and European hosting settled before anything goes live. Retention windows are chosen rather than inherited from a default.
A narrow scope wired to your tools and scored against a business test set your team wrote with us. Roughly a fifth of that set is cases the agent is expected to decline.
Single sign-on, full logging, human escalation and explicit limits on every write. Actions that change a customer-visible field require approval until the test set says otherwise.
An answer dashboard, a monthly review and iterations on the cases nobody anticipated. The test set runs on every change, so a regression is caught before your users find it.
A scope needs an indicator attached before the build starts. It tells us when to stop tuning, and lets the team say the agent is not working without it becoming an opinion.
Written properly, a business test set is portable. When a new model appears we run it and get an answer the same afternoon. Model choice becomes a measurement, not a debate.
Reads happen freely. Drafts and notes happen automatically and can be undone. Anything customer-visible waits for a human. Every write carries the run that produced it.
Undocumented processes, or ones where two teams disagree on the correct answer, are process problems wearing an AI costume. Fixing the process first is faster to deliver.
Two weeks to find out whether an agent is the right answer for the process that costs your team the most time.
Book a diagnostic