Job definition
The task, the inputs it receives, what a finished result looks like and what the agent must never do.
AI agents for business that answer enquiries, qualify leads, draft follow-ups and prepare reports, with clear limits and escalation to your team.
An AI agent should own one clear job, use approved information and pass anything uncertain to a person.

An AI agent is software that can read a request, decide which steps to take, use your systems or documents to complete them and report back. That makes agents useful for work that is too varied for simple rules, such as answering product questions from your own documentation, qualifying an inbound lead or preparing a first draft of a proposal. It also makes them risky if the job, the permitted actions and the escalation path are vague. We define all three before building anything.
A working agent is mostly design and testing. The model is only one part of it. These are the pieces we specify and test with you.
The task, the inputs it receives, what a finished result looks like and what the agent must never do.
The documents, FAQs, CRM fields or tools the agent may use, with permissions limited to what the job needs.
When the agent stops and hands over to a person, and what context it passes along so nobody starts from scratch.
Real examples run before launch, then ongoing review of conversation logs, errors and hand-off rates.
If the work needs licensed professional judgement, involves irreversible financial decisions, or your source information is out of date, an agent is the wrong tool. A simpler automation or better documentation will serve you better.
Each agent starts as a narrow pilot with real examples from your business. We would rather launch an agent that does one job reliably than one that attempts everything and needs constant correction.
Our recommendations are grounded in recognised industry guidance, including OECD AI Principles.
Agree the task, success criteria, permitted actions and escalation triggers with the person who will own the agent.
Gather and clean the documents and data the agent relies on, and restrict access to what the job needs.
Run the agent against real past enquiries or tasks and fix wrong answers before anyone outside the team sees it.
Go live with logs, review routines and a clear process for improving answers over time.
Most useful agents fall into a few categories. Each has its own page explaining scope and limits.
The main cost drivers are how many systems the agent connects to, how much source material needs preparing, how many types of request it must handle, and how much testing the risk level demands. Model usage is an ongoing running cost that grows with volume. We scope a single job first so costs are visible before you commit to more.
Not quite. A traditional chatbot follows scripted paths. An AI agent interprets the request and can take steps in other systems, such as checking availability or updating a CRM record. Many businesses need a well-built chatbot rather than an agent, and we will say so.
Yes. Language models can give wrong or invented answers. That is why agents are limited to approved information, tested on real examples before launch, and designed to hand uncertain cases to a person.
We design agents to access only the data their job requires and document where information is processed. Privacy obligations under the Australian Privacy Act or New Zealand Privacy Act 2020 are part of the design, not an afterthought.
In most cases, yes, provided the systems have an API or supported integration. We confirm this before the build is scoped.
Start with the Growth Systems Audit to see where response times, follow-up and repetitive handling are costing you, then decide whether an agent is the right fix.