Use Cases
Three situations, drawn from real workflows.
No named case studies yet. When we publish results, they will come with baselines and production evidence. Until then, here are the patterns and what we'd check before promising anything.
Bring one workflow01
Scenario
Customer service and support triage
The situation.
Support volume grows faster than the team. Routine tickets bury the hard ones, response times slip, and every new hire takes months to ramp.
What an agent does.
Reads every incoming ticket, resolves routine ones with answers grounded in your knowledge base and order data, drafts responses for human review where confidence is lower, and escalates exceptions with full context attached.
What changes.
Routine volume stops queuing on humans. Specialists work the exceptions they're paid for. Response time and backlog fall. The team gains capacity, and leadership decides how to use it.
What we'd check first.
We would start with thirty to fifty historical tickets with known-correct resolutions, a clear escalation boundary, and a named owner for the workflow.
02
Scenario
Back-office document processing
The situation.
Invoices, claims, or order documents arrive in every format. People re-key data between systems. Errors leak money quietly, and month-end depends on heroics.
What an agent does.
Extracts the data, validates it against your systems of record, processes the clean documents end to end, and routes exceptions to a human with the discrepancy already identified.
What changes.
Clean documents flow without touches. Error and rework rates drop. Every document carries an audit trail. The team handles exceptions, not volume.
What we'd check first.
We would check how much the documents vary, whether verified historical outputs exist, and whether the agent can realistically access the required systems.
03
Scenario
The stalled pilot
The situation.
The pilot impressed everyone six months ago. It's still not in production. The vendor says "almost." Nobody can say whether to push forward or stop.
What we do.
We test the prototype against historical cases, identify what is missing, and decide whether to salvage or rebuild it. Then we either ship it with monitoring or document why it should stop.
What changes.
The organization gets a decision to ship or stop that it can defend, and stops paying for "almost."
What we'd check first.
We would check whether the traces, code, and system access are available, who owns the workflow, and whether the original business case had a baseline.
04
Closing
Your workflow won't match these exactly. That's expected.
The pattern that matters: one bounded workflow, a measurable baseline, and an owner. If you have those three, bring it.
Bring one workflow