Billing & Revenue-Assurance Reconciliation AI Agent
Reconcile rating, mediation and billing records, assemble each discrepancy with the evidence behind it, and hold every case for the named assurance analyst, who decides whether a bill moves at all.
Ingesting rated events, mediation output and billed charges from supported billing, mediation or warehouse sources.
02
Normalising identifiers, periods and units, and carrying each record forward with the system it came from.
Reason
03
Matching rated usage against mediation output, and both against what the bill actually charged.
04
Applying the rating, discount and tax rules configured for that service type and market.
05
Assembling each discrepancy with the records that produced it, and marking what the data leaves ambiguous.
Decide
06
Classifying direction, the period covered and age against the backbilling window that applies.
07
Routing every case to the named assurance analyst, and halting on any charge the subscriber has disputed.
Out
08
Retaining the source records, the rule that fired, the case and the analyst's decision against the account.
09
Executing write actions only inside the approval boundaries agreed during implementation.
→Product statement
The agent proposes a correction; the assurance analyst decides whether a bill moves, and an upward correction needs the subscriber's authorisation first.
Example workflow
One discrepancy, records to decision
AgentHuman
1Records receivedRated event files, mediation output, billed charges or a raised dispute
2Case assembledRated usage, mediation records and billed charges, each with the period it covers
3Discrepancy proposedDirection, period, amount and confidence
4Controls appliedDirection split, backbilling-window checks, dispute-flag checks and confidence threshold
No human action required
Stages 1 to 4 run unaided, and no bill moves at any of them — the agent is assembling a case, and the analyst's lane opens at the confidence gate.
5DecisionBranches at the confidence threshold
High confidence
Goes to the assurance analyst to decide.
Low confidence
Adds a billing-controls read first.
Analyst decision
The case is held with its source records, its direction and the confidence.
Approve · Amend · Send to billing review
Approved — released to the billing team▼
6Billing systems updatedOnly where write access and approval policy allow it
7Outcome evaluatedAnalyst amendments, dispute outcomes, authorisation evidence and later reversals
Amendments
Every analyst amendment is counted in the evaluation.
What should not run autonomously
Human approval stays in control
Outside the boundary — human approval required8 items
Posting any adjustment to a customer's account.
Recovering an amount found to be under-billed.
Charging anything without authorisation evidence.
Deciding the backbilling window for a correction.
Automation boundaryAgent acts unaided
✓Reconcile records across rating, mediation and billing.
✓Assemble each discrepancy with the source records behind it.
✓Classify the direction, the period and the age of each one for the named owner.
✓Hold every case for the named analyst, and post nothing.
Any write happens inside the boundaries agreed at implementation, never ahead of the analyst's authorisation.
Changing a rating, mediation or discount rule.
Deciding whether a subscriber authorised a charge.
Referring a disputed charge onward to collections.
Changes to thresholds or the assurance rule set.
Example output
One discrepancy, annotated
The case the agent proposes is shown with the records it was found in.
Reconciliation output · single caseIllustrative example
Account
Discrepancy found
Period covered
Source of record
Confidence
Direction
Post-paid mobile
Rated usage present in mediation and absent from the billed charge
One billing cycle
Mediation output
93%
Under-billed — held for authorisation
As receivedTaken from the rated-event and mediation records — nothing on this side is computed by the agent.
Records usedRated event fileMediation outputBilled charge line
Why it is heldIt points upward — that needs the subscriber's authorisation, not only the analyst's.
ActionApproveAmendSend to billing review
What the score decidesBelow the configured threshold the case picks up a billing-controls read before 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 rated eventFrom the billing records
03Reconciliation
Match against the records
Draw on the rated events, the mediation output and the rules configured for that service type.
01Approved path
Find it, and prove it
Routine matches reconcile without an analyst reading them.
02Human review
Send review to the cases
Upward cases, disputed accounts and low-confidence matches are marked, so the analyst's read starts where the exposure sits.
04Build an evidence trail
The discrepancy, the records it was found in and the analyst who signed it stay on the case.
Integrations
Typical integrations
Five system groups connect to the same agent. Which of them are in scope is decided in discovery.
Billing and chargingAmdocs · Netcracker CSG · Optiva · Ericsson BSS
Mediation and ratingNetwork mediation platforms CDR and event pipelines
Data and reportingSnowflake · Databricks Finance and general ledger
Agent
Billing reconciliation
Reads the records Assembles the case Holds for the analyst
Cases and workflowServiceNow · Jira Adjustment and dispute queues
Integration availability depends on the client's existing systems and API access.
Agent controls
Six layers between the model and the bill
Each control wraps the one inside it. What a layer does not catch is named in the map below it.
L6 · Outermost — last line of defenceInward → L1 · closest to the model
L6Rollback / safe modeRevert the agent to reporting-only when evaluation or production signals degrade.Roll back
L5Version monitoringTrack model, prompt, rule-set and jurisdiction-configuration changes.Track
L4TraceabilityRecord the source records, the rule that fired, the case and the decision time.Record
L3Analyst authorisationHold cases for the named analyst; it governs release, not whether the case was read correctly.Gate
L2Adjustment guardrailsTest cases against the backbilling window, the dispute flag and the rule set configured for that service type and market; a failure returns the case.Restrict
L1Confidence thresholdsRoute low-confidence cases to a billing-controls read before the analyst sees them.Require review
Model coreCase assembled — direction, period, amount, records and confidence
L1 – L2Test whether a case may stand
L3Puts the decision in an analyst's hands
L4 – L5Keep the discrepancy and the records behind it
L6Reverts to reporting-only when signals degrade
How Nestack evaluates it
Evaluate the whole reconciliation — not only the discrepancy at the end.
Coverage runs the whole depth of the workflow, and every layer is cut by slice.
Surface — the case the analyst reads
Depth of coverage ▼
E1Final-output evaluationDid the discrepancy hold up against the records behind it?
E2Step-level evaluationDid the agent use the right records, rules and period?
E3Tool evaluationDid it read and write the correct account and the correct field?
E4Confidence calibrationDo low-confidence cases actually attract more analyst amendments?
E5Slice evaluationHow does performance change across specific revenue streams?
E6Business outcomeHow many cases needed an amendment, or a reversal after the bill moved?
Floor — the outcome the carrier answers for
Failure modes
Where each failure originates in the agent
Seven failure modes, placed at the stage each one originates.
Agent lifecycleDirection of processing →
01 · Retrieval1 mode
KX-03
Superseded rate table
Charges compared against a rate table no longer in force.
Stage gathersRated events, mediation output, billed charges and rules
02 · Reasoning2 modes
KX-04
Direction misread
An over-billing is assembled as an under-billing.
KX-06
Window miscounted
A case is raised outside the backbilling limit that applies.
Stage proposesDirection, period, amount and confidence
03 · Tool / write2 modes
KX-02
Evidence not attached
A case reaches the analyst without the records behind it.
KX-05
Duplicate case raised
The same discrepancy is raised twice in one cycle.
Stage writesOnly where write access and approval policy allow it
04 · Output1 mode
KX-01
Phantom discrepancy
A timing difference is reported as a billing error.
Stage returnsThe case the analyst reads and decides on
05 · Change / Version1 mode
KX-07
Silent rule drift
A model or rule change widens what the agent will raise.
Stage tracksModel, prompt, rule set and threshold config
Sev-1 · an adjustment outside the boundarySev-2 · a wrong case reaches the billSev-3 · records degrade, case routes to review
The slice the aggregate hides here is interconnect and roaming: it carries most of the rework while the portfolio rate holds steady. Nestack reports by slice, and against your baseline — never an industry figure.
Slice performance — reported separately, not only in aggregateIllustrative example
Slice
Failure rate
Lift
Lift vs. threshold
Status
Interconnect and roaming records
6.8%
3.9×
Review
Promotional and discount plans
5.4%
3.1×
Review
Prorated mid-cycle changes
3.5%
2.0×
Watch
Steady-state post-paid lines
1.6%
0.9×
Normal
Bar: analyst-amendment-rate lift vs. the steady-state baseline · scale 0–4.0× · tick marks the 2.0× review threshold2 of 4 slices over threshold
Evidence-linked improvement
The loop closes on a regression case
A cycle closes when the failure is a regression case the next release has to pass. That suite is what the next discrepancy raised is measured against.
Improvement cycle · five stagesSwitchback — the path turns at Improve and returns at Learn
01Detect
Analyst-amendment rate rises in a revenue stream.
02Diagnose
The case file is the unit of diagnosis: an analyst reads its records until the cause narrows to one.
03Improve
The change ships against a version, with the cases that exposed it attached.
04Verify
Release is blocked until the affected regression cases pass again.
05Learn
The case joins the permanent suite and the assurance playbook.
Learn → DetectThe return edge. The next detection is measured against 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
01Assurance workflow discovery and boundary definition.
02Billing, mediation and rating assessment.
03Rating, discount and backbilling-window rule mapping.
04Record ingestion and normalisation.
05Matching logic and evidence binding.
06Confidence scoring and case routing.
07Analyst authorisation workflow.
08Billing and mediation integration.
09Authorisation-evidence cases.
10Guardrails and adjustment controls.
11Case-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 revenue stream, one entityProductionProduction billing systemsAdvancedMultiple entities / markets
Introduced at Pilot
Reconciliation and case assembly✓✓✓
Analyst authorisation✓✓✓
Discrepancy-quality baseline✓✓✓
Introduced at Production
Reporting by revenue stream—✓✓
Approval workflow in your systems—✓✓
Write-back after authorisation—✓✓
Mediation-stack integration—✓✓
Introduced at Advanced
Multi-jurisdiction rule sets——✓
Multi-stage assurance approvals——✓
High event volume——✓
Multi-entity assurance 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 rated-event and mediation extracts→Record ingestion and field mappingWeek 1
02Representative discrepancies and their outcomes→Matching baseline, rule extraction and evidence bindingWeek 2
03Your rating, discount and backbilling rules→Rating, discount and backbilling-window rule mappingWeek 1
04Access to relevant APIs, feeds or exports→Billing, mediation and rating assessment, then integration setupWeek 2
05Adjustments you would not want posted→Evidence cases and the evaluation suiteWeek 4
06What must reach an analyst before a bill moves→Confidence scoring, case routing, guardrails and approval controlsWeek 3
07Named assurance analysts to decide cases→Analyst authorisation 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
Each phase sits on the weeks it actually occupies, and week 5 carries both evaluation and launch work.
PhaseW1W2W3W4W5W6
DiscoveryW1
BuildW2 – W3
EvaluateW4 – W5
Pilot & LaunchW5 – W6
Week focusW1Assurance workflow discovery, rule mapping and the automation boundaryW2Billing and mediation integration and the matching baselineW3Reconciliation workflow, confidence logic and authorisation controlsW4Evaluation suite, backbilling-window checks and failure-mode testingW5Rating-source integration, pilot cases and targeted correctionsW6One billing cycle reconciled under the assurance team, then handover
Reading the bandA bar covers the weeks its work is named in, and nothing else. The fifth week genuinely carries two kinds of work.
At the end of W6Validation closes on a live cycle, and Agent Care picks up monitoring.
DurationSix-week plan shown · typical delivery 4–6 weeks depending on scope confirmed in discovery.
Next step · Telecom AI agent
Build a revenue-assurance agent around your billing records.
Show us how a bill is built. You need to bring three things: the rated-event and mediation extracts, the rules that price them, and the analyst who signs a correction off.
