Customer Success AI agent · Contact provenance
Relationship Intelligence AI Agent
Cite where a contact came from before anyone works it — mailbox, ticket or vendor, and the day it landed — then hold the record for the data owner who clears the notice.
- Typical delivery
- 4–6 weeks
- Deployment
- Your stack
- Data owner
- Source first
- After launch
- Agent Care
What this agent does
Assembles the picture, never clears it
In
- 01
A contact is enriched, and the source it came from is written into the record before anyone works it.
- 02
A source is read, and whether it was a mailbox, a ticket or a vendor feed is recorded as it stands.
Reason
- 03
A contact is emailed the day after enrichment, and the notice was owed at that email, not a month later.
- 04
A record is pushed to a downstream tool, and the duty lands at first disclosure, not on the old clock.
- 05
A support contact is repurposed into an engagement picture, and the new purpose re-triggers what is owed.
Decide
- 06
An exemption is claimed, and what it substitutes is a public notice, so that notice is what has to exist.
- 07
A shared inbox falls outside and a named person does not, because the line is legal person, not B2B.
Out
- 08
A contact arrives with no referral chain behind it, and that is the cohort where the breach was found.
- 09
Execute write actions only inside the approval boundaries agreed during implementation.
Product statement
Enrichment, provenance and notice timing belong to the agent. Clearance belongs to a named data owner, who sends what is owed and answers for it afterwards.
Example workflow
One contact, source to clearance
- 1Source material receivedMailbox and calendar metadata, CRM records, support tickets or third-party enrichment
- 2Contact assembled and sourcedThe person, the account, the source each field came from and the day that source was read
- 3Engagement picture drawnWho is corresponding, who has gone quiet, and the evidence sitting under each
- 4Controls appliedProvenance checks, natural-person checks, notice-timing checks and confidence
No human action required
Stages 1 to 4 run unaided, and nothing reaches the person at any of them — the agent is assembling, and the data owner lane opens at the notice gate.
Goes to the named data owner to clear.
Adds a privacy review first.
Data-owner review
The record is held with its source, its notice status and the dates behind both.
Clear · Append source · Send to privacy review
Cleared — by the named data owner
- 6CRM and contact records updatedOnly where write access and records policy allow it
- 7Outcome evaluatedSource stability, notice timeliness, owner corrections and what review found
Corrections
Each owner correction is counted in the evaluation.
What should not run autonomously
Human approval stays in control
Outside the boundary — human approval required
8 items
- Deciding that an exemption applies to a contact.
- Sending the notice a person is owed.
- Judging whether a source may lawfully be used.
- Approving a new enrichment vendor.
Automation boundary
Agent acts unaided
- ✓Write the source of each contact into the record.
- ✓Flag which of the three Article 14 deadlines falls first on a contact.
- ✓Hold any contact enriched without its source recorded.
- ✓List every downstream tool that received an enriched contact record.
Nothing is sent to a person and no exemption is claimed except by a named data owner.
- Deciding what a quiet contact means for the account.
- Answering a person who asks where you got their data.
- Choosing which mailboxes the agent may read at all.
- Changes to the CRM, the notice text or the sources.
Example output
One contact record, annotated
The stakeholder mapping agent owns which role a person plays and what evidenced it; this one owns where a contact came from and what is owed for holding it. Below is one record as the agent leaves it.
Contact record · single account
Illustrative example- Contact
- Named individual, customer account
- Recorded as
- Quiet since the last quarter
- Account
- Source, recorded
- Evidence of record
- Vendor feed, 3 August 2026
- Confidence
- Held, no notice sent
- Held for
- The named data owner, by name
As received
Built from one mailbox metadata trail and one vendor field, and it claims nothing about the person beyond them.
What the record holds
- Mailbox metadata
- Support ticket
- Vendor enrichment
Why no notice here
Telling a person you hold their data is a call the data owner makes.
What the score decides
Below the configured threshold a record gets a privacy read before the data owner sees it.
Action
ClearAppend sourceSend to privacy reviewValue
Where AI adds value
The same four claims, placed at the point in the workflow where each one applies.
Where the value lands
Value 01 – 04
Every contact record
From the source that carries it
Where the record is used
A system reading staff mailboxes is objectively suitable for monitoring their conduct, so German co-determination attaches; that argument is worked on the operations process-mining agent page.
Somebody never told them
A hyperlink trail worked for Experian only where the person had been handed the first link by their own counterparty; nobody handed your enriched contact anything.
What was checked, and not found
No register, filing, licence or certification attaches to a company that buys enrichment and never sells it on: the broker who sold it certifies under penalty of perjury; the buyer holding it produces nothing.
Build an evidence trail
The contact, the source it came from and the notice owed on it stay together.
Integrations
Typical integrations
Five system groups connect to the same agent. Which of them are in scope is decided in discovery.
Mailbox and calendar
- Microsoft 365
- Google Workspace
- Metadata, not message bodies
CRM and account records
- Salesforce
- HubSpot
- Contacts, owners and account history
Support and ticket systems
- Zendesk
- Jira Service Management
- Requesters and their correspondence
Agent
Contact provenance and engagement
- Reads each source
- Records the provenance
- Holds for the data owner
Third-party enrichment
- Enrichment vendors
- public registers
- Bought details, with a source
Observability & evaluation
- OpenTelemetry
- Langfuse
- Supported monitoring/evaluation sources
Integration availability depends on the client's existing systems and API access.
Agent controls
Six ledgers between the vendor and the CSM
Six ledgers stacked deep, the last the strictest. What is entered is set out in the map below.
L6 · Outermost — last line of defence
Inward → L1 · closest to the model
- L1 – L2
- Test whether a record may stand
- L3
- Leaves the notice to a named data owner
- L4 – L5
- Keep the contact and the source behind it
- L6
- Stops before the enrichment step when signals degrade
How Nestack evaluates it
Evaluate the whole assembly — not only the record that comes out.
Coverage runs the whole depth of the workflow, and every layer is cut by slice.
Surface — the record a CSM opens
- E1Final-output evaluationDid the record carry the source it was actually built from?
- E2Step-level evaluationDid the agent read the right mailbox, the right period and the live source rules?
- E3Tool evaluationDid it read and write the correct contact and the correct account?
- E4Confidence calibrationDo low-confidence records actually attract more owner corrections?
- E5Slice evaluationHow does performance change across specific sources?
- E6Business outcomeHow many records needed a correction before the owner cleared them?
Floor — the source a record rests on
Failure modes
Where each failure originates in the agent
Seven failure modes, each placed where it first becomes visible.
Agent lifecycle
Direction of processing →
01 · Retrieval
1 mode
- NY-03
Source not carried over
The record arrives with no origin attached to it.
Stage gathers
The mailboxes, the tickets, the feeds and the dates
02 · Reasoning
2 modes
- NY-04
Contact asserted, not sourced
A field appears with no source behind it.
- NY-06
Legal person read as a natural one
A shared inbox is treated as an individual.
Stage proposes
The contact, the source and the notice status
03 · Tool / write
2 modes
- NY-02
Thin provenance passed forward
A record moves on without the privacy read.
- NY-05
Contact bound to wrong account
The person is filed against another account.
Stage writes
Only where write access and approval policy allow it
04 · Output
1 mode
- NY-01
Used, notice unrecorded
The record shows use but not the notice under it.
Stage returns
The contact a CSM works and a customer meets
05 · Change / Version
1 mode
- NY-07
Silent source drift
A vendor reworks its feed while the stored source keeps the old name.
Stage tracks
Model, prompt, source rules and notice dates
- Sev-1 · a contact used with no source
- Sev-2 · a notice falls due and is missed
- Sev-3 · source unclear, record held back
Affected slices
Bought contacts absorb the corrections
A source-level provenance figure can read clean while contacts bought from vendors carry most of the notice failures. Nestack reports the correction rate by source, not only in total.
Slice performance — reported separately, not only in aggregate
Illustrative example| Slice | Failure rate | Lift | Lift vs. threshold | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vendor-enriched contacts | 11.7% | 3.7× | Review | |
| Mailbox-derived contacts | 8.4% | 2.6× | Review | |
| Support-ticket contacts | 5.2% | 1.6× | Watch | |
| Customer-supplied contacts | 2.6% | 0.8× | Normal |
Bar: correction-rate lift vs. customer-supplied baseline · scale 0–4.0× · tick marks the 2.0× review threshold
2 of 4 slices over threshold
Evidence-linked improvement
What an unsourced contact costs
The cycle ends when the contact held without notice is a regression case. That suite is what the next record enriched is measured against.
Improvement cycle · five stages
Switchback — the path turns at Improve and returns at Learn
- 01
Detect
Correction rate rises on vendor-enriched contacts.
- 02
Diagnose
The name that appeared in the CRM with a title, a mobile and no record of where it came from is worked backwards until one source is left standing.
- 03
Improve
Number the change; the records that drove it ride along with it.
- 04
Verify
Nothing releases while a single record case is still red.
- 05
Learn
It is kept for good, and the notice rules are rewritten alongside it.
Learn → Detect
The return edge. The next record 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, contact assembly, evaluation, integration, then production validation and handover.
Workstream
Week 1Week 2Week 3Week 4Week 5Week 6
- 01Source provenance and automation-boundary work.Week 1
- 02Mailbox, ticket, CRM and vendor sources.Week 1, Week 2
- 03Source-to-contact and provenance-coverage mapping.Week 1, Week 2
- 04Contact source ingestion.Week 2
- 05Source, contact and notice binding.Week 2, Week 3
- 06Provenance scoring and review routing.Week 3
- 07Data-owner clearance workflow.Week 3, Week 4
- 08CRM and mailbox integration.Week 5
- 09Source and notice cases.Week 4, Week 5
- 10Guardrails and enrichment controls.Week 4
- 11Contact-trail instrumentation.Week 5, Week 6
- 12Deployment, documentation and Agent Care handover.Week 6
12 workstreams · 6 weeks · bar shows the weeks a workstream is active — several run in parallel
Final 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 tier | PilotOne account, one cycle | ProductionProduction success workflow | AdvancedMultiple regions / vendors |
|---|---|---|---|
| Introduced at Pilot | |||
| Contact assembly to your sources | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Named data-owner clearance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Contact-record baseline | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Introduced at Production | |||
| Reporting by data source | — | ✓ | ✓ |
| Privacy review workflow in your systems | — | ✓ | ✓ |
| Approved write-back | — | ✓ | ✓ |
| Mailbox-and-calendar integration | — | ✓ | ✓ |
| Introduced at Advanced | |||
| Multi-vendor provenance | — | — | ✓ |
| Cross-region notice packs | — | — | ✓ |
| Large contact books | — | — | ✓ |
| Multi-source provenance controls | — | — | ✓ |
| Build price | From $5,000 | From $8,000 | Custom quote |
- Final build price
- Confirmed after discovery based on integrations, workflow complexity, contact volume, approval controls and deployment requirements.
- Separate from build
- Build 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 bring
We build with it
01Your live accounts and the contacts each one names
→Source capture and notice-status versioning
Week 102Representative mailbox, ticket and vendor sources
→Source binding, provenance logic and the contact baseline
Week 203Your privacy calendar and the data owners it names
→Source mapping, notice rules and the automation boundary
Week 104Access to relevant APIs, feeds or exports
→Mailbox, ticket and vendor source assessment, then integration setup
Week 205Records you would not want traced
→Provenance cases and the evaluation round
Week 406What no contact record may establish
→Provenance scoring, review routing, guardrails and release controls
Week 307A named data owner who clears the record
→Release to the named data owner, then pilot and production validation
Weeks 5–6
Nothing else is required
Deployment, documentation and Agent Care handover are ours.
Delivery timeline
Four phases across six weeks
The grid follows the work rather than the other way about, so one week does the work of two here.
Phase
W1
W2
W3
W4
W5
W6
- DiscoveryW1
- BuildW2 – W3
- EvaluateW4 – W5
- Pilot & LaunchW5 – W6
Week focus
W1Source discovery, notice rules and the automation boundary
W2Source integration and the contact-record baseline
W3Provenance logic, notice timing and release controls
W4Evaluation suite, provenance cases and failure-mode testing
W5CRM and mailbox integration, pilot records and targeted corrections
W6One enrichment round run under the data owner, then Agent Care handover
- Reading the band
- Each bar covers only the weeks its own work is named for, and week five is shared by design.
- At the end of W6
- Once the provenance record validates, Agent Care assumes the agent.
- Duration
- Six-week plan shown · typical delivery 4–6 weeks depending on scope confirmed in discovery.
Next step · Customer Success AI agent
Build a relationship intelligence agent around the sources your CRM never wrote down.
Show us one account you enrich and the record of where the last contact came from. A person whose details you got from somewhere other than them is owed a notice naming that source, due at the earliest of three moments. A contact that cannot be sourced comes back as a finding.
- Typical delivery
- 4–6 weeks
- Deployment
- Your live accounts
- Named data owner
- Source first
- After launch
- Agent Care available
Nestack Agents · Relationship intelligence
AGT-CX-08 · Agent Care available after launch