Use cases
Understand. Act. Follow through. Across the systems your team uses.
Explain a change, save an approved update or remind the person who owns the next step. These scenarios show the work an assistant can support. The connected systems, permissions and enabled workflows determine what is available in your deployment.
All three of these questions already have answers inside your systems. Somebody is queueing to ask the person with the login.
Read them as scenarios
Three different questions. One layer underneath all of them.
No client is named on this site without written consent, so nothing here is a customer story. Each page ends with the same section: what has to be true in your own estate before that scenario runs, so the work is scoped before anybody commits to it.
The questions differ and the systems differ. The grant, the four checks and the row written afterwards are the same in all three, which is the argument for a layer rather than three separate integrations.
| the grant | one row, one project |
| the checks | four, narrowing only |
| actions | enabled by workflow |
| the record | written either way |
The three
Different questions, one decision layer underneath.
The same grant, the same four gates and the same audit trail serve all three. What changes is which system answers and which written rules apply to the answer.
Finance and planning
"Load this planning template and show me the changes before saving." Validate the data, review the differences and save approved values to the named source environment. Configure reminders for owners whose submissions are still outstanding.
Delivery operations
"Check this handover and remind the owner if it is still incomplete on Friday." Apply your written process, record the check and follow up using the timing and recipients you agree.
Consultants on several clients
One person, four clients, four separate estates. Belonging to several is normal here and governed, rather than the ambiguity that makes most systems fail closed or, worse, guess.
What binds them
The part that does not change between them.
A use case is usually where a vendor stops being specific. These three describe different work and rest on exactly the same four properties, which is the argument for a layer rather than three integrations.
True in all three
- Nothing is copied. The read happens against your system at the moment somebody asks.
- One person, one grant. Access is a row somebody created, not a shared login.
- Actions have an agreed scope. Source updates require an enabled workflow; important changes include a preview and approval.
- Refusals are recorded too. "It would not tell me" is data, and it is usually the more useful half.
Different in each
- Which system answers, and therefore whose access rules narrow the result before ours do.
- Which written rules apply, approved by a named person on your side, in your vocabulary.
- What a good answer looks like, which is the part only somebody who does the job can define.
Also answering today
Documents and CRM answer today too. And they carry the strongest permission story of the four.
These two are not written up as scenarios above. Somebody asks whether a document says what they think it says, or which accounts are theirs to chase, and the answer comes back the same way - with the narrowing having happened before we are involved at all.
Document libraries
Read through Microsoft Graph, which is the strongest permission story here: the person's own access narrows the result before we see it, and we store no credential of our own for it. A document somebody cannot open today stays unopenable through an assistant.
Sales and CRM
"Which renewals need attention this week?" Connect account insight to a follow-up with an owner and a due date. Configured workflows can send reminders and surface overdue work; available record updates depend on your CRM integration and permissions.
Planning models, CRM, document libraries and task trackers answer today. The connection vocabulary behind them covers six categories, so if the system holding your answer is not one of the four it is very likely already described. The whole catalogue is published.