Build the request list, ask the client, check what arrives against the request and report what is still outstanding — inside approved wording, contact preferences, chase limits and human escalation.
Build the request list from the engagement scope, the prior-year file and the entity structure.
02
Take documents in from the client portal, email intake, secure upload or messaging channel.
Reason
03
Classify each arriving document by type, entity, period and the request it answers.
04
Check it against that request — right entity, right period, complete and readable.
05
Reconcile against what is already on file so nothing already supplied is asked for again.
Decide
06
Detect partial, mismatched or unreadable uploads and requests no channel has satisfied.
07
Follow the approved chase cadence and contact preferences, and hold anything else for a person.
Out
08
Report outstanding items, ageing and chase history to the engagement owner and the partner.
09
Message clients and write to the engagement file only inside the approval boundaries agreed during implementation.
→Product statement
The agent asks, receives, checks and reports; deciding that a client has complied, and every message outside the approved set, stay with a person.
Example workflow
One missing document, end to end
AgentHuman
1Request list assembledEngagement scope, prior-year file, entity structure and the firm's standard list
2Request issuedApproved wording, named contact, agreed channel and due date
3Document receivedPortal upload, email attachment, secure link or forwarded message
4Checked against the requestDocument type, entity, period, legibility, completeness and what is already held
No human action required
Stages 1 to 4 run without a person in the loop — the first ask and each on-cadence chase use wording the firm has already signed, so the lane stays empty until the gate.
5DecisionSplits on the confidence threshold
High confidence
Right entity, right period, readable and complete — follows the approved path.
Low confidence
Wrong period, wrong entity, partial or unreadable — enters human review.
Human review
The upload is held with the request it was matched to, the checks it failed and the chase history.
Approve · Correct · Request review
Approved — handed back▼
6Filed and status updatedOnly where write access and approval policy allow it; the request is not closed by the agent
7Outcome evaluatedCompletion, days to complete, chases per response, mismatches and opt-outs
Overrides
Rejections and re-matches made in review are counted in the evaluation.
What should not run autonomously
Human approval stays in control
Outside the boundary — human approval required8 items
Deciding a request has been satisfied.
Closing the request list.
Any message outside the approved wording.
Escalating to a partner.
Automation boundaryAgent acts unaided
✓Build the request list from the engagement and the prior-year file.
✓Issue approved requests and on-cadence chases to named contacts.
✓Classify arriving documents and check them against the request.
✓Report outstanding items, ageing and chase history to the owner.
Client messages and write actions run only inside the approval boundaries agreed during implementation. Closing a request is not one of them.
Chasing beyond the agreed cadence.
Contacting anyone not on the engagement.
Handling a document sent to us in error.
Changing cadence, wording or preferences.
Example output
One request and one upload, annotated
Everything the agent proposes is attached to the request it claims to answer.
Collection output · single requestIllustrative example
Request
Channel
Received
Matched to
Confidence
Check result
Year-end bank statements
Client portal upload
Two PDFs
Bank statements request
93%
Period incomplete — held
As receivedTaken from the upload and the channel it arrived on — nothing on this side is inferred, and no file is opened outside the engagement.
Evidence usedRequest-list entryPeriod and entity readPrior-year document set
Why it is heldPart of the requested period is missing, so the request stays open and the client is told what is still needed.
ActionApproveCorrectRequest review
What the score decidesBelow the configured threshold the upload routes to review instead of the approved path. Marking the request satisfied is a human action either way.
Value
Where AI adds value
The same four claims, placed at the point in the workflow where each one applies.
Where the value landsValue 01 – 04
All open requestsAcross every engagement
03Requests & checks
Apply client-specific context
Use the engagement scope, prior-year file, entity structure and the firm's approved wording.
01Approved path
Remove the routine chasing
Requests and on-cadence reminders go out on approved wording without anyone drafting them.
02Human review
Put people on the awkward cases
Partial, mismatched and disputed uploads move to review instead of every response being opened by hand.
04Build an evidence trail
Retain every message sent, document received, check result, confidence, evaluator result and human correction — on both paths.
Integrations
Typical integrations
Five system groups connect to the same agent. Which of them are in scope is decided in discovery.
Aggregate completion can look acceptable while a small number of client cohorts absorb most of the chasing and nearly all of the mismatched uploads. Nestack reports performance by slice, not only in total.
Slice performance — reported separately, not only in aggregateIllustrative example
Slice
Failure rate
Lift
Lift vs. threshold
Status
First-year and newly onboarded clients
5.4%
3.4×
Review
Multi-entity client groups
4.0%
2.5×
Review
Photographed and scanned uploads
3.0%
1.9×
Watch
Portal-active repeat clients
1.1%
0.7×
Normal
Bar: lift vs. portal-active baseline · scale 0–4.0× · tick marks the 2.0× review threshold2 of 4 slices over threshold
Evidence-linked improvement
The client's reaction is evidence too
This is the agent your clients hear from, so its signals come from them — an opt-out, a rejected upload, a chase that produced nothing — and every wording change is re-approved first.
Improvement cycle · five stagesSwitchback — the path turns at Improve and returns at Learn
01Detect
Chases per response, opt-outs or rejected uploads rise in a cohort.
02Diagnose
Traced to the request wording, the channel, the contact record or the check.
03Improve
The wording, cadence or check is re-approved by the firm and version-linked.
04Verify
Re-run against held-out requests and the messages they would have produced.
05Learn
The objection becomes a standing rule in the approved wording library.
Learn → DetectThe return edge. Each re-approved wording and cadence limit binds the next cycle before a client sees it.
Typical build scope
Twelve workstreams across six weeks
The build scope read against the delivery timeline. Week structure follows the six-week plan — discovery, intake, matching and messaging, evaluation, integration, then production validation and handover.
WorkstreamWeek 1Week 2Week 3Week 4Week 5Week 6
01Workflow discovery and automation-boundary definition.
02Request-list templates and rollforward.
03Contact records and consent mapping.
04Portal, email and upload intake.
05Document classification and request matching.
06Entity, period and completeness checks.
07Message wording and firm tone review.
08Chase cadence, limits and opt-out rules.
09Human review and escalation workflow.
10Evaluation suite and regression cases.
11Engagement filing and status reporting.
12Observability, deployment and Agent Care handover.
12 workstreams · 6 weeks · bar shows the weeks a workstream is active — several run in parallelFinal scope and sequence confirmed in discovery
Engagement tiers
What each tier includes
Rows are the capabilities named in each tier's scope. Higher tiers include everything below them.
Capability✓ in scope · — not at this tierPilotOne engagement typeProductionProduction integrationAdvancedMultiple entities / systems
Introduced at Pilot
Request lists and document checks✓✓✓
Human approval✓✓✓
Baseline evaluation✓✓✓
Introduced at Production
Approved message wording—✓✓
Chase cadence and rate limits—✓✓
Opt-out and preference handling—✓✓
Portal and email intake—✓✓
Observability and evaluation—✓✓
Introduced at Advanced
Multi-entity request routing——✓
Multi-stage approvals——✓
Enterprise controls——✓
Build priceFrom $5,000From $8,000Custom quote
Final build priceConfirmed after discovery based on engagement types, portal and document-management integrations, client volume, message-approval controls and deployment requirements.
Separate from buildBuild pricing is separate from recurring Agent Care, which covers managed monitoring, evaluations, incidents and verified improvements after launch.
What we need from you
What you bring, and what we build with it
Each input maps to a piece of build scope and a week in the delivery timeline.
You bringWe build with it
01Your standard request lists and prior-year engagement files→Request-list templates and prior-year rollforwardWeek 1
02Client and contact records, and who may be contacted about what→Contact records, permissions and consent mappingWeek 1
03Access to the portal, mailbox and document management system→Portal, email and upload intake, then integration setupWeek 2
04A representative sample of what clients actually send you→Document classification, request matching and the check baselineWeek 2
05Your approved wording, chase rules and opt-out list→Message wording, chase cadence, rate limits and opt-out handlingWeek 3
06The requests you chased hardest last year→Evaluation suite, regression cases and failure-mode testingWeek 4
07Named reviewers and the partner who owns escalation→Human review and escalation workflow, then pilot and validationWeeks 5–6
Nothing else is requiredDeployment, documentation and Agent Care handover are ours.
Delivery timeline
Four phases across six weeks
Phases are drawn over the weeks they actually occupy. Week 5 carries evaluation and the first supervised sends to a real client.
PhaseW1W2W3W4W5W6
DiscoveryW1
BuildW2 – W3
EvaluateW4 – W5
Pilot & LaunchW5 – W6
Week focusW1Workflow discovery, contact and consent mapping, automation boundaryW2Intake channels, classification and matching baselineW3Message wording, chase cadence and rate limitsW4Evaluation suite, escalation workflow and dry-run testingW5Supervised sending to one engagement, every message readW6Full collection cycle on a live engagement, then handover
Reading the bandBars span only the weeks their work is named in. No message reaches a client before week 5.
At the end of W6One collection cycle has run under review, chase log and opt-outs checked, then Agent Care takes over monitoring.
DurationSix-week plan shown · typical delivery 4–6 weeks depending on scope confirmed in discovery.
Next step · Accounting AI agent
Build a document-collection agent around your request process.
Show us your request lists, your portal and mailbox, and the wording and chase cadence you would defend to a client. We'll agree the wording, the cadence limits and the point where a person takes the conversation over.
