Draft client updates, answer routine account questions from the figures of record, and track actions, approvals and open items — a named account owner sends every message, and scope changes go through change control.
Read the account — the signed scope, the rate card, the open actions and the last thing this client was told.
02
Take campaign figures only from the reporting source of record, stamped with the window and the time pulled.
Reason
03
Draft the update, the answer or the recap from the account record, in the account owner's own register.
04
Mark what the signed scope covers and what is new work, and quote no rate — pricing is a commercial decision.
05
Check every sentence that promises, agrees, approves or concedes against what the agreement supports.
Decide
06
Hold anything that commits the agency, moves a date or quotes a figure that has not reconciled.
07
Route the draft to the named account owner, and anything that changes scope to whoever signs it.
Out
08
Log actions, owners, due dates and approvals against the account, with the message each came from.
09
Retain the source of every figure, the draft, the owner's edit and the version the client received.
→Product statement
The agent drafts and tracks. Nothing reaches a client until a named account owner sends it, and no scope, price or timeline changes without the contract's change control.
Example workflow
One client request, end to end
AgentHuman
1Request or trigger receivedA client email, the weekly update slot, a meeting recap or an action falling due
2Account context gatheredThe scope in force, the rate card, prior approvals, open actions and the last thing this client was told
3Figures pulled and reconciledCampaign numbers taken from the reporting source of record and checked against the billed view, time-stamped
4Draft written and checkedThe reply, update or recap drafted, then every commitment, date, rate and figure checked against the record
No human action required
Stages 1 to 4 run without a person in the loop — the context, the figures and the draft are finished before the account owner opens anything.
5DecisionSplits on whether the draft commits the agency
In scope, figures reconciled
Reaches the account owner ready to send.
Commits, or moves scope or a date
Held with the sentence named, not sent.
Account owner and change approver
The account owner reads the draft against the account and sends it under their own name; anything that moves scope, price or a date goes to whoever signs a change order first.
Send · Rewrite · Raise a change
Approved — handed back▼
6Record updatedActions, owners, due dates and approvals written to the account, alongside the version the client actually received
7Outcome evaluatedFigure accuracy against source, commitments the reviewer flagged, approval-trail completeness and escalations
Owner edits
Every edit an account owner makes to a draft is counted.
What should not run autonomously
Human approval stays in control
Outside the boundary — human approval required8 items
Sending any message to a client.
Agreeing a scope change, a price or a rate.
Committing to a date, a deliverable or a make-good.
Recording an approval the client did not give.
Automation boundaryAgent acts unaided
✓Draft updates, replies and recaps from the account record and the scope in force.
✓Pull campaign figures from the reporting source of record.
✓Track actions, owners, due dates and outstanding approvals across accounts.
✓Flag the sentence that commits the agency before anyone can send it.
Write actions run only inside the approval boundaries agreed during implementation. Sending to a client and agreeing a scope change are not among them.
Quoting a performance figure that has not reconciled.
Answering from another client's account or spend.
Escalating, apologising or conceding fault on an account.
Changing the scope record or the approval thresholds.
Example output
One client update, annotated
Everything the agent drafts is attached to the account record and the figures it was built from.
Client-update output · single draftIllustrative example
Request
Account
Figures pulled
Draft
Confidence
Commitments
Weekly client update
Retainer, scope in force
Today, 09:00
Held before send
92%
One found, flagged
As receivedThe request, the scope in force and the time the figures were pulled — nothing on this side is inferred.
Evidence usedSigned scope of workPlatform report, datedLast approval on file
Why it is heldOne line offers a creative round the scope does not cover. That is a change order.
ActionSendRewriteRaise a change
What the score decidesHow closely the account owner re-reads before sending — not whether the client will accept it.
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
Every client requestFrom email, calls and briefs
03Account record
Answer from the account's record
Use the scope in force, the approval trail and the reporting source of record — not what the thread remembers.
01Approved path
Take the writing off the account team
Updates, recaps and routine answers are drafted before the account owner opens the account, so they edit and send rather than assemble.
02Human review
Catch the commitment in the draft
A sentence that agrees scope, a date or a rate is named before it is sent, instead of surfacing when the client asks the agency to honour it.
04Build an evidence trail
Retain the source of every figure, the scope in force, the draft, the account owner's edit and the version the client received — 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 draft quality can look acceptable while a few account cohorts carry most of the flagged commitments, most of the figure corrections and nearly all of the scope disputes. 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
Unhappy or at-risk accounts
5.1%
3.0×
Review
Scope and change questions
3.7%
2.2×
Review
Same-category competing clients
2.6%
1.5×
Watch
Routine in-scope status updates
1.2%
0.7×
Normal
Bar: failure-rate lift vs. routine status-update baseline · scale 0–4.0× · tick marks the 2.0× review threshold2 of 4 slices over threshold
Evidence-linked improvement
The bill for a sentence arrives weeks after it is sent
A commitment only looks wrong when the client acts on it, weeks later. The cycle must reach the message that caused it, not last week's drafts.
Improvement cycle · five stagesSwitchback — the path turns at Improve and returns at Learn
01Detect
A dispute, an unbilled hour or a reissued figure traces back to a sent draft.
02Diagnose
Isolated to the source read, the scope in force, the commitment check or the send.
03Improve
The rule, source or template is changed, re-approved by the account lead and version-linked.
04Verify
Re-run against held-out drafts from that account, including the one that caused the dispute.
05Learn
The disputed sentence becomes a regression case and a line in the account playbook.
Learn → DetectThe return edge. Every cycle also re-reads the scope and rate card in force — last quarter's correct answer is this quarter's out-of-scope work.
Typical build scope
Twelve workstreams across six weeks
The build scope read against the delivery timeline. Week structure follows the six-week plan — discovery, account and scope sourcing, drafting and pre-send checks, evaluation, review workflow, then production validation and handover.
WorkstreamWeek 1Week 2Week 3Week 4Week 5Week 6
01Workflow discovery and automation-boundary definition.
02Account, scope and rate-card sourcing.
03Email, CRM and project-system access.
04Reporting source-of-record mapping.
05Client-separation and scoping controls.
06Draft generation in the owner's register.
07Commitment and scope checks before send.
08Action, approval and change-order tracking.
09Account-owner review and send workflow.
10Evaluation suite, leakage probes and regression cases.
11Meeting transcription and recap controls.
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 account teamProductionProduction CRM integrationAdvancedMulti-office / multi-client
Introduced at Pilot
Drafted updates and replies✓✓✓
Figures from the source of record✓✓✓
Account-owner send-off✓✓✓
Baseline evaluation✓✓✓
Introduced at Production
Commitment and scope flagging—✓✓
Action and approval tracking—✓✓
Client-separation controls—✓✓
CRM and reporting integration—✓✓
Observability and evaluation—✓✓
Introduced at Advanced
Meeting recaps and minutes——✓
Multi-office and enterprise controls——✓
Build priceFrom $5,000From $8,000Custom quote
Final build priceConfirmed after discovery based on accounts and systems in scope, reporting sources, client-separation requirements, message volume, 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
01The signed scope and rate card for each account in scope→Account, scope and rate-card sourcingWeek 1
02Who owns each account and who signs a change order→Automation-boundary definition and the send-off workflowWeek 1
03Access to email, CRM and project systems→Email, CRM and project-system integrationWeek 2
04The reporting source you treat as authoritative→Reporting source-of-record and reconciliation rulesWeek 2
05Your conflict rules for competing accounts→Client-separation and retrieval-scoping controlsWeek 2
06Real threads where a commitment or a scope dispute happened→Evaluation suite, leakage probes and regression casesWeek 4
07Named account owners and change approvers→Account-owner review, send workflow and pilot accountsWeeks 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 both the evaluation work and the first drafts an account owner sends.
PhaseW1W2W3W4W5W6
DiscoveryW1
BuildW2 – W3
EvaluateW4 – W5
Pilot & LaunchW5 – W6
Week focusW1Accounts in scope, who owns each and who signs a changeW2Scope and rate-card sourcing, system access and client separationW3Draft generation, commitment checks and the pre-send holdW4Action and approval tracking, evaluation suite and leakage probesW5Owner review workflow, first drafts sent and targeted correctionsW6Production validation, recap controls and Agent Care handover
Reading the bandClient separation is built in week 2, before a single account is drafted against in week 3. The bars show that dependency, not a smooth ramp.
At the end of W6Drafts have gone out under named account owners, and every flagged commitment was cleared or removed first, then Agent Care takes over monitoring.
DurationSix-week plan shown · typical delivery 4–6 weeks depending on scope confirmed in discovery.
Next step · Advertising AI agent
Build a client-services agent around your account teams.
Show us one account — the signed scope, where its numbers come from, and who is allowed to send that client anything. We'll take that account's weekly update and one live scope question end to end, and show you what the agent would have held back.
