Skip to content

Find the task your team wants to make easier

Explore planning examples for research, claims, support and shared inboxes. Each brings the useful information, the reviewer and the next decision into view.

KYC Research Workflow

Workflow blueprint showing controls, auditability, and evaluation for compliance workflows

Illustrative example. Define the baseline and useful result with the team that would review the work.

Discuss this example

The work to understand

This workflow models a common KYC research process. The baseline assumes multi-system data gathering, analyst review, and strict audit requirements.

The goal of the blueprint is to show how approvals, audit trails, and evaluation harnesses work together before any production access is granted.

An approach to explore

The workflow orchestrates data gathering across approved sources, compiles a structured summary, and routes it for human approval before any escalation.

  • Identify the approved sources an analyst needs for a case
  • External data enrichment from approved vendor sources
  • Structured case summary generation with citations
  • Human approval gates before any case escalation
  • Agree which source records and review decisions must be retained

Measures to compare

Research How long does a reviewer need per case?
Sources Can each finding be traced to a document?
Review Which cases need an analyst’s judgment?
Effort Does checking a draft reduce repetitive work?

Checks to agree

  • RBAC with analyst/supervisor/auditor roles
  • Check that required actions and corrections can be found in the records
  • Human approval required for escalation decisions
  • Daily evaluation runs against golden test cases
  • Review applicable documentation requirements with the compliance team

Tools to evaluate

Claude API Temporal PostgreSQL Azure AD

Claims Intake Workflow

Workflow blueprint of document extraction, triage, and human-in-the-loop review

Illustrative example. Define the baseline and useful result with the team that would review the work.

Discuss this example

The work to understand

This models a common claims intake workflow with variable document formats and routing rules.

The focus is on showing how extraction, confidence thresholds, and review queues operate with auditability before production access.

An approach to explore

The workflow processes incoming documents, extracts key fields, validates against policy rules, and routes to adjusters with structured summaries.

  • Multi-format document processing (PDF, images, emails)
  • Policy lookup and coverage verification
  • Automated complexity scoring for routing
  • Structured data extraction to claims system
  • Adjuster review queue with agent recommendations

Measures to compare

Fields Are the extracted details correct?
Time How long does complete intake take?
Exceptions Are missing or ambiguous documents flagged?
Contact What does an adjuster need before following up?

Checks to agree

  • Confidence thresholds for automatic vs. manual review
  • Confirm appropriate handling and access for personal information
  • Agree which records the compliance reviewer needs
  • Weekly accuracy evaluation against adjuster decisions
  • Escalation paths for ambiguous documents

Tools to evaluate

GPT-4 Vision AWS Lambda Guidewire API S3

IT Helpdesk Workflow

Workflow blueprint of knowledge-assisted support with escalation and approvals

Illustrative example. Define the baseline and useful result with the team that would review the work.

Discuss this example

The work to understand

This models a common IT helpdesk workflow with repetitive Tier‑1 issues and strict access controls.

The goal is to show safe action execution (allowlists + approvals) and measurable outcomes before production access.

An approach to explore

The assistant retrieves knowledge, drafts responses, and executes approved actions under an allowlist with human approvals where required.

  • RAG over IT knowledge base with freshness tracking
  • Evaluate the permissions and review needed for identity operations
  • Check the exact ticket actions and permissions required
  • Choose an employee access channel and test who can use it
  • Smart escalation with context handoff to humans

Measures to compare

Answers Can staff use the approved guidance?
Feedback Do employees find the answer useful?
Access Are restricted actions stopped for review?
Effort How much checking does each request need?

Checks to agree

  • Action allowlist (only approved operations)
  • Manager approval for access grants above threshold
  • Rate limiting per user and operation type
  • Full conversation logging for security review
  • Weekly false-positive/negative analysis

Tools to evaluate

Claude API Pinecone Okta APIs Slack Bolt

Email Triage Workflow

Workflow blueprint of classification, drafting, and approval for operations teams

Illustrative example. Define the baseline and useful result with the team that would review the work.

Discuss this example

The work to understand

This models a busy shared inbox with varied request types, urgency rules, and escalation paths.

The focus is on showing safe response drafting, approval gates, and measurable queue impact before production access.

An approach to explore

The agent classifies emails, extracts key entities, drafts responses, and routes complex issues with context.

  • Multi-label classification (type, urgency, account tier)
  • Entity extraction (shipment IDs, dates, locations)
  • Check whether approved shipment information is available for a reply
  • Response drafting with human approval
  • Priority queue for time-sensitive issues

Measures to compare

Routing Does each message reach the right queue?
Drafts Which replies need a reviewer’s correction?
Response How long do important messages wait?
Context Can the next person understand the request?

Checks to agree

  • Human approval required before sending any response
  • Escalation rules for high-value accounts
  • Classification confidence thresholds
  • Weekly accuracy review with CS team
  • Feedback loop for continuous improvement

Tools to evaluate

GPT-4 Microsoft Graph McLeod TMS Power Automate

How to tell whether the work is getting easier

Compare the proposed workflow with the way your team works today. Look at handling time, answer quality and the effort people need to check and correct the result.

Time
Compare total handling time with the current process
Quality
Check wrong answers, missed details and corrections
Review
Record how much checking each result needs
Records
Confirm the source and decision can be found later

What a useful workflow needs around the model

A useful draft is only part of the work. People also need sources they can check, clear permissions and a reliable way to handle mistakes.

Retrieval + Citations

Grounded responses with source tracing and citation logging.

Approval Gates

Human sign-off for high-impact actions and policy checks.

Audit Trail

Structured logs for inputs, tool calls, decisions, and approvals.

Evaluation Harness

Representative tasks rerun after each change.

Cost Controls

Budget caps, token tracking, and usage alerts.

Runbooks

Escalation paths, rollback steps, and ownership mapping.

Other tasks you may want to investigate

Start with a task your team knows and ask what information, review and permissions a useful test would require.

AP Invoice Triage

Classify invoices, match to POs, flag exceptions, and route for approval.

Match accuracy Reviewer effort

Vendor Onboarding

Collect documents, validate fields, and drive approval workflows.

Missing details Approval owner

HR Case Triage

Route HR tickets, draft responses, and enforce policy checks.

Correct queue Policy review

Contract Review Queue

Extract clauses, flag risks, and route to legal approvals.

Clause evidence Legal review

Incident Response

Collect signals, draft summaries, and coordinate escalations.

Source context Escalation owner

Policy Q&A

Answer questions with citations and approval workflows.

Answer accuracy Source citations

Make the result easy to check

Before testing, decide what to record so a reviewer can see which source was used, what was suggested and what happened next.

What to record

Choose the evidence people need to compare the test with the current process.

Accuracy vs baseline Check examples
Approval latency Record wait time
Cost per case Use actual cost
Drift detection Review changes

When to review the test

Review examples after changes and add mistakes that the team wants future tests to catch.

Baseline capture

Week 0 snapshot of KPI, error, and volume mix.

Weekly regression sweep

Golden sets + edge case evaluation on new releases.

Human review sampling

Choose review samples based on the decisions and errors that matter.

Release readiness gates

Agree the results the team needs before a wider release.

How the team handles a problem

Decide who can pause the work, correct a result and return to the current process.

  • Runbooks with escalation paths and recovery steps
  • Named owners for approvals, monitoring and incidents
  • Test how to pause the work and return to the existing process
  • Agree which records security reviewers need to inspect
  • Agree who monitors the work and which failures need attention

What your team should be able to review

Keep the task description, test results and review responsibilities together so the people responsible can decide whether to continue.

Workflow Scope

Clear workflow map, roles, and exit gates.

Workflow map RACI Acceptance gates

Security & Governance

Threat modeling and governance evidence.

Threat model OWASP LLM checklist NIST AI RMF mapping

Evaluation & QA

Testing and regression readiness.

Golden tests Regression suite Error taxonomy

Operations Package

Runbooks and escalation readiness.

Runbooks Alerting Incident playbooks

Cost & Performance

Budget controls and latency targets.

Token budget Latency targets Cache strategy

Deployment Readiness

Final release checklist and access review.

Release checklist Rollback plan Access review

Have a workflow question?

Choose one recurring task and bring a representative example. We’ll discuss what would make the next handoff easier for your team.