Service

Agentic systems & workflow automation

Agents that carry a multi-step process end to end, with the approval boundaries and audit trail defined before anything runs unsupervised.

An agent differs from a chatbot in one respect that decides the whole project: it doesn’t just answer, it acts. It reads a record, makes a decision and changes something. That makes the interesting question not which model to use, but what it is allowed to do without asking — and how you’d know afterwards what it did.

The three shapes this work takes

  • Support. Incoming tickets triaged, classified and resolved where they’re routine — checking the account, looking up the order, issuing the standard fix — and escalated with context attached where they aren’t. The gain is in the eighty percent that were always going to get the same answer.
  • Commerce. Product discovery, order status, returns and reorders handled inside the store against live catalogue and inventory data. This is where an online store stops being a catalogue and starts answering questions at 11pm.
  • Back office. Form routing, document classification, approval chains, and moving data between two systems nobody ever intended to integrate. Unglamorous, and usually the highest return of the three because the work is pure repetition.

Why the data layer comes first

An agent is only as good as what it can read. A model given stale, contradictory or incomplete data will make confident wrong decisions faster than a person would — and it will make them at volume.

So the warehouse is usually the first phase, not an afterthought: ingestion from the systems you already run, a schema that survives new sources being added, and enough history to query rather than reconstruct. That layer pays for itself in reporting even if the agent is never built, which is a reasonable way to de-risk the whole programme.

What we insist on before anything runs unsupervised

The failure mode here isn’t a model being wrong. It’s a model being wrong in a way nobody notices for six weeks.

  • A documented boundary. What the agent may do alone, what needs a human signature. Anything touching money, a citizen record or an irreversible action keeps an approval step unless you explicitly decide otherwise.
  • An audit trail with reasoning. Every action logged with why it was taken. “The system did it” is not something a department can put in front of an auditor.
  • Evaluation against real history. Behaviour measured on actual past cases, including the ones that went wrong, before it touches a live queue.
  • A rollback. A defined way to switch it off and return to the manual process without losing the work in flight.

Where an agent turns out to be the wrong answer — too little volume, too many exceptions, a process that changes every quarter — we’ll say so during scoping. That’s the same test we apply to everything else on this service.

What's included

How we scope this

Agentic support systems

Triage, classification and resolution of routine tickets end to end — reading the account, checking the order, taking the action — with a defined point where a person takes over.

Agentic commerce

Agents that handle product discovery, order status, returns and reorders inside a store, working against real catalogue and inventory data rather than a scripted FAQ.

Workflow automation

Multi-step back-office processes — form routing, document classification, approval chains, moving data between systems that were never designed to talk.

Data warehousing

Ingestion from the systems you already run into a warehouse your reporting and your agents both read from, with a schema that survives new sources being added.

Approval boundaries and audit trails

What an agent may do alone, what needs a human signature, and a log of every action with the reasoning behind it — because "the system did it" is not an answer anyone can act on.

Evaluation before production

Agent behaviour measured against real historical cases, including the ones that went wrong, before it touches a live queue.

How we work

The process, in order

  1. 01

    Map the process

    The actual steps, the exceptions and who currently signs off — written down before any of it is automated, because most processes are not documented anywhere accurate.

  2. 02

    Build the data layer

    The agent needs to read reliable, current data to be worth anything. Where that doesn't exist yet, the warehouse comes first and the agent second.

  3. 03

    Pilot on a narrow slice

    One queue, one process, with a person reviewing every action. Measured against how the process performs today, not against a demo.

  4. 04

    Widen with guardrails

    Autonomy extended only where the pilot earned it, with monitoring, escalation and a documented rollback.

FAQ

Frequently asked questions

How is an agent different from the chatbot you already offer?
A chatbot answers a question. An agent completes a task — reads the record, decides, takes the action, and reports what it did. That difference is mostly about what it’s allowed to change, which is why the approval boundaries matter more than the model.
How do we stop it doing something we didn't intend?
By deciding up front what it may do alone and what needs a person, and logging every action with the reasoning. Agents run on a narrow slice under review first, and gain autonomy only where the pilot earned it. Anything touching money or a citizen record keeps a human approval step unless you explicitly decide otherwise.
Do we need a data warehouse before any of this?
Usually yes, and it’s the part people don’t budget for. An agent reading stale or contradictory data makes confident wrong decisions faster than a person would. Where the data layer doesn’t exist, we build that first and say so during scoping rather than after.
What if the process isn't worth automating?
That’s a legitimate outcome and we’d rather reach it in week one. Some processes run at too low a volume, change too often, or have too many exceptions to be worth the maintenance. We’ll say so instead of building it anyway.

Have a process that runs on people copying between systems?

Tell us the steps and roughly how often it runs. We'll tell you whether an agent is worth it, and what has to exist first.

Talk about automation

Peak performance
& connectivity

31.0785°N 77.1800°E — Kasumpti, Shimla — 2,205 m