Reconcile receipts, issues, returns and consumption against the magazine record, and keep shotfirer, magazine and security authorisations current — for the named person who reports. No blast design, ever.
Stages 1 to 4 run unaided, and nothing is reported at any of them — the agent is reconciling, and the lane for the named person opens at the confidence gate.
5DecisionBranches at the confidence threshold
High confidence
Goes to the responsible person.
Low confidence
Adds a magazine keeper read first.
Responsible person
The pack is held with its movements, its variance and the confidence.
Approve · Amend · Send to keeper review
Approved — released to the register▼
6Magazine records updatedOnly where write access and approval policy allow it
7Outcome evaluatedAmendment distance, variance outcomes, licence lapses and post-report corrections
Amendments
Every amendment made in review is counted in the evaluation.
What should not run autonomously
Human approval stays in control
Outside the boundary — human approval required8 items
Reporting a loss or theft to a security authority.
Firing a shot, or authorising one to be fired.
Designing the blast — pattern, burden, charge mass.
Predicting vibration, airblast or fly-rock.
Automation boundaryAgent acts unaided
✓Reconcile receipts, issues, returns and consumption per magazine.
✓Carry each movement with the record it came from.
✓Track licence, clearance and competency against the roster.
✓Raise the variance with its clock and hold it for the named person.
Writes run only inside the boundaries agreed at implementation, never ahead of the named person.
Clearing a misfire, or judging when to approach.
Deciding whether a variance is a loss.
Owning the security or explosives management plan.
Changes to threshold, clock or approval rules.
Example output
One magazine variance, annotated
Everything the agent reconciles is attached to the record it was drawn from.
Reconciliation output · single magazineIllustrative example
Magazine
Variance line
Unreconciled quantity
Source of record
Confidence
Basis of record
Surface day magazine
Issues to the north face exceed the returns booked back against them
40 kg
Magazine day record
86%
Issue dockets and magazine entries
As receivedTaken from the issue dockets and the magazine entries — nothing on this side is written by the agent.
Source facts usedIssue docketsEnd-of-shift returnsMagazine day record
Why this is openThe site total still balances; this magazine does not, and a person decides.
ActionApproveAmendSend to keeper review
What the score decidesBelow the configured threshold the variance picks up a keeper read before.
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 magazineFrom the issue and return records
03Reconciliation
Tie the issues to the record
Movements are set against the magazine record on file; the blast record belongs to the blaster who signs it.
01Approved path
The count has to reconcile
The 2024 United States Bomb Data Center report counts losses reported and reconciliations closed.
02Human review
This is not the safety pack
The shipped safety compliance agent drafts SWMS, assembles isolation points and checks permit packs. This one counts stock.
04Build an evidence trail
The issue, the magazine record against it and the person who reported stay on the ledger.
Integrations
Typical integrations
Five system groups connect to the same agent. Which of them are in scope is decided in discovery.
Magazine and stock systemsMagazine day records Explosives stock ledgers
ERP and inventorySAP · Oracle ERP Pronto · Microsoft Dynamics
Supplier and deliveryDelivery dockets Contractor issue records
Agent
Explosives inventory reconciliation
Reads the movements Reconciles the record Holds for the person
Licence and personnelHR and roster systems Training and clearance records
A site-level reconciliation-closure rate can read as clean while a few magazine and product slices carry most of the unexplained variance. Nestack reports the variance rate by slice, not only in total.
Slice performance — reported separately, not only in aggregateIllustrative example
Slice
Failure rate
Lift
Lift vs. threshold
Status
Contractor-held magazines
9.9%
3.7×
Review
Packaged product and detonators
7.2%
2.7×
Review
Bulk emulsion magazines
4.9%
1.8×
Watch
Fixed site magazines
1.5%
0.6×
Normal
Bar: variance-rate lift vs. fixed-site magazine baseline · scale 0–4.0× · tick marks the 2.0× review threshold2 of 4 slices over threshold
Evidence-linked improvement
Each cycle ends with one more case
The loop shuts when the unexplained discrepancy is a regression case. That suite is what the next reconciliation run is measured against.
Improvement cycle · five stagesSwitchback — the path turns at Improve and returns at Learn
01Detect
Variance rate rises for one magazine slice.
02Diagnose
The cartridges that were issued to a face and never came back on paper are traced through the dockets until the cause narrows to one.
03Improve
Any change ships with a number, and the discrepancies attach to it.
04Verify
One ledger case still failing is enough to hold the release.
05Learn
One case joins the suite, one line joins the magazine record.
Learn → DetectThe return edge. Detection next cycle starts from a suite one case longer.
Typical build scope
Twelve workstreams across six weeks
The build scope read against the delivery timeline. Week structure follows the six-week plan — discovery, sources, reconciliation workflow, evaluation, integration, then production validation and handover.
WorkstreamWeek 1Week 2Week 3Week 4Week 5Week 6
01Explosives workflow discovery and boundary mapping.
02Magazine and ERP source assessment.
03Magazine, licence and jurisdiction clock mapping.
04Movement ingestion and normalisation.
05Reconciliation logic and source binding.
06Confidence scoring and variance routing.
07Responsible-person review workflow.
08Magazine and roster-system integration.
09Reconciliation and licence cases.
10Guardrails and reporting controls.
11Ledger-trail instrumentation.
12Deployment, documentation 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 magazine, one siteProductionProduction stock systemsAdvancedMultiple sites / jurisdictions
Introduced at Pilot
Reconciliation to your record✓✓✓
Responsible-person approval✓✓✓
Reconciliation-accuracy baseline✓✓✓
Introduced at Production
Reporting by magazine—✓✓
Variance workflow in your systems—✓✓
Approved write-back—✓✓
Magazine-system integration—✓✓
Introduced at Advanced
Multi-jurisdiction clock rules——✓
Multi-stage security approvals——✓
High magazine count——✓
Multi-site licence controls——✓
Build priceFrom $5,000From $8,000Custom quote
Final build priceConfirmed after discovery based on integrations, workflow complexity, transaction 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
01Your magazine list and stock items→Magazine, licence and clock rule mappingWeek 1
02Representative issue and return records→Movement ingestion, normalisation and the reconciliation baselineWeek 2
03Your licence, clearance and competency register→Licence-currency mapping and automation-boundary definitionWeek 1
04Access to relevant APIs, feeds or exports→Magazine and roster-system assessment, then integration setupWeek 2
05Ledgers you would not want counted→Discrepancy cases and the evaluation suiteWeek 4
06What no discrepancy report may soften→Confidence scoring, variance routing, guardrails and approval controlsWeek 3
07Named responsible persons to review variances→Responsible-person review workflow, then pilot and production validationWeeks 5–6
Nothing else is requiredDeployment, documentation and Agent Care handover are ours.
Delivery timeline
Four phases across six weeks
What sets each width is elapsed time and not layout, so the fifth band honestly carries a pair of them.
PhaseW1W2W3W4W5W6
DiscoveryW1
BuildW2 – W3
EvaluateW4 – W5
Pilot & LaunchW5 – W6
Week focusW1Explosives workflow discovery, rule mapping and the automation boundaryW2Source integration and the reconciliation baselineW3Reconciliation workflow, confidence logic and approval controlsW4Evaluation suite, licence-currency checks and failure-mode testingW5Roster-system integration, a pilot magazine and targeted correctionsW6One reconciliation cycle run under the responsible person, then Agent Care handover
Reading the bandA bar covers only the weeks its own work is named in. The week 5 overlap is real, not padding.
At the end of W6Once the ledger validates, Agent Care assumes the running agent.
DurationSix-week plan shown · typical delivery 4–6 weeks depending on scope confirmed in discovery.
Next step · Mining AI agent
Build the reconciliation the magazine record has to survive.
Show us your magazines, your issue records and who reports. What you get is a per-magazine reconciliation, a licence register read against the roster actually working, and a variance pack with its clock on it. What you do not get is blast design, fragmentation, vibration and airblast prediction or fly-rock control — those are engineering acts a certified person signs by name, and a product implying otherwise would be claiming a legally-attributable act.
