The criteria for the first process
Not every routine is ready for automation. Before choosing the first candidate, check four signs:
- Repeatability. The action happens regularly by the same rules — not once a quarter in a different way.
- Materials. There is input data: emails, meeting recordings, contracts, a database, notes. The agent works on materials, not on guesses.
- A verifiable result. The outcome can be opened and checked: a draft, minutes, an answer with quotes, a document.
- A responsible person. There is an employee who confirms the result — without one, automation turns into an uncontrolled flow.
The same principles are fixed in the engagement models: before launch the task, the input data, the expected artifact, the acceptance criteria, the limits and the person who makes the decision are fixed.
Candidate 1: incoming email
The mail assistant determines the topic and priority of an email, highlights deadlines and commitments and prepares a draft reply in the accepted tone. It is useful when there is a large flow of typical incoming mail, a single tone of the team's replies is needed and deadlines must be tracked. Sending — only after human confirmation.
Candidate 2: meeting minutes
The local meeting scribe transcribes the recording and compiles the summary, decisions, tasks and responsible persons. It suits internal meetings with sensitive data, regular status updates and interviews. In an approved fully local configuration, the recording is not sent to an external service; speaker names and decisions are checked by the person responsible for the meeting.
Candidate 3: search across contracts
The legal RAG navigator answers questions about the body of contracts and regulations with exact quotes and source references. Typical scenarios: finding clauses in a body of contracts, comparing revisions, preparing materials for the lawyer. The legal position is checked by the specialist in charge.
Candidate 4: questions about metrics
The database consultant translates a natural-language question into a query to the permitted PostgreSQL views and answers with an explanation of the calculation and a link to the source table. It takes the load of typical "how many", "what is the trend", "why did it change" questions off the analysts.
Candidate 5: preparation of requirements
The requirements analyst leads the materials from discovery to artifacts following GOST 19.201-78, GOST 34.602-89 and ISO 29148:2018, tying every requirement to a source. It is useful for teams for whom writing specifications is a regular process, not a one-off task.
If none of the five candidates fits your rules — that is an argument for an assessment before custom development, not a reason to automate an unstable process.
Questions and answers
What is the cheapest way to start?
With a ready-made subagent deployment starting at $1,500: one process, one function, and a verifiable result. The price covers services; infrastructure and subscriptions are billed separately. The demo is free.
Can I automate a process with no described rules?
Not reliably. A subagent performs one focused task according to documented rules. Define the step before automating it.
What if the routine is non-standard?
Use custom development: discovery, design, and integration. The scope and price are quoted after discovery.
Which processes are automated first?
Email, meeting minutes, search across contracts, questions about metrics and the preparation of requirements.
How should I choose a process?
Look for repeatability, a clear artifact, and a verifiable result. Processes with these characteristics are easier to automate.
Why not start with creative tasks?
Creative tasks are hard to check with criteria; the 'result criterion first' principle requires a measurable artifact.
What if the routine is spread across departments?
Control points are assigned by role, and each department confirms its part of the result.
How much routine should one subagent cover?
One subagent — one step of the process; several steps are covered by different subagents.
How do I avoid automating a flawed process?
Document the step first: an unstable process will produce inconsistent results.
What to do with the results of automation?
Check them against the journal and the acceptance criteria; return disputed cases for rework.