Transportation AI agent · Rate negotiation
Rate-Negotiation AI Agent
Counter inside authority limits you set, on your own data only, and stop at acceptance — because a rate confirmation your agent sends is a contract your firm is held to.
- Typical delivery
- 4–6 weeks
- Deployment
- Your stack
- Person accepts
- Limits you set
- After launch
- Agent Care
What this agent does
Counters inside limits, and stops at acceptance
In
- 01
Your own rate history, lane costs and published market indices, from supported TMS, rating or contract sources.
- 02
Per-tenant isolation that is architectural and auditable, rather than a filter applied to what a screen shows.
Reason
- 03
Non-public competitor rate data never pooled into a recommendation at runtime — the line the DOJ decree draws.
- 04
Cross-tenant training data, where any is used, kept at least twelve months old, non-price and non-hyperlocal.
- 05
Authority limits you set — floor, ceiling, lane, volume and term — bounding every counter the agent drafts.
Decide
- 06
Symmetric governors, with no rate floor and no control that resists a decrease more than an increase.
- 07
Auto-accept off by default, so acceptance waits on the named person who holds the authority to give it.
Out
- 08
A full transcript retained: every offer, every counter and the authority each one was made under.
- 09
Write actions only inside the approval boundaries agreed during implementation.
Product statement
The agent counters; a named person accepts, and under UETA §14 whatever it sends is your firm's own word.
Example workflow
One negotiation, offer to acceptance
- 1Rate request receivedCarrier bid, shipper request, tender response or lane review
- 2Position assembledYour own rate history, the lane cost, published indices and the authority limits in force, each with its source
- 3Counter preparedOffer, limits, data sources and confidence
- 4Controls appliedRuntime data-source checks, authority-limit checks, symmetry checks and the confidence threshold
No human action required
Stages 1 to 4 run unaided and accept nothing — the counter is drafted, and the person's lane opens at the confidence gate.
Goes to the named person to accept.
Adds a desk read first.
A person accepts
The offer is held with its limits, its data sources and the confidence.
Accept · Counter · Send to the desk
Accepted — confirmation released
- 6Rate records updatedOnly where write access and approval policy allow it
- 7Outcome evaluatedLimit breaches stopped, counters drafted, acceptance rates and what each negotiation settled at
Overrides
Every override of a limit is counted in the evaluation.
What should not run autonomously
Human approval stays in control
Outside the boundary — human approval required
8 items
- Accepting a rate or returning a rate confirmation.
- Using non-public competitor rate data at runtime.
- Setting a rate floor or an asymmetric governor.
- Turning auto-accept on, or widening what it covers.
Automation boundary
Agent acts unaided
- ✓Assemble the position from your own rate history and indices.
- ✓Draft a counter that sits inside the limits you have set.
- ✓Show the data each figure came from, and how old that data is.
- ✓Hold the offer for the named person who holds the authority.
Any write happens inside the boundaries agreed at implementation, never ahead of approval.
- Agreeing accessorial, detention or fuel terms.
- Committing volume, lane or term beyond your limits.
- Deciding that a limit breach may be waived this once.
- Changes to the authority limits or the data rules.
Example output
One counter, annotated
Everything the agent offers is attached to the limits it was working inside.
Negotiation output · single lane
Illustrative example- Lane
- Dry van, regional
- Counter drafted
- Held at the mid-point of the range, and expires on the stated date
- Offer made
- $2,140.00
- Data behind it
- Own rate history, published index
- Confidence
- 91%
- Authority applied
- Ceiling, lane and term limits
As received
Taken from your own rate file and a published index — nothing on this side came from another broker.
What it was built from
- Your own lane rate history
- Published market indices
- The authority limits in force
Why it could be offered
It sits inside the ceiling you set and a person still decides and it is logged..
What the score decides
Below the configured threshold the offer picks up a desk read before it is put to anyone at all.
Action
AcceptCounterSend to the deskValue
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 negotiation
From the TMS or the bid queue
Counter inside your limits
Draw on your own rate history, your lane costs and the published indices you subscribe to.
It can bind you — so it holds
Routine lane counters come back drafted and inside the range.
Send the rest to a person
Limit breaches, thin rate history and low-confidence offers are marked, so the desk's read starts where risk concentrates.
Build an evidence trail
The offer, the limits it was working inside and the person who accepted it stay on the confirmation.
Integrations
Typical integrations
Five system groups connect to the same agent. Which of them are in scope is decided in discovery.
TMS and rate records
- McLeod
- MercuryGate
- Trimble
- Revenova
Rating and market data
- DAT
- Greenscreens
- Published market indices
Contracts and tenders
- Master agreements
- RFP tools
- Rate confirmations
Agent
Rate negotiation
- Reads your own data
- Drafts the counter
- Holds for acceptance
Finance and settlement
- Settlement
- accounting
- Audit and pay platforms
Observability & evaluation
- OpenTelemetry
- Langfuse
- Supported monitoring/evaluation sources
Integration availability depends on the client's existing systems and API access.
Agent controls
Six layers between the model and the offer
Each layer contains the next. What gets past the set is listed in the map below.
L6 · Outermost — last line of defence
Inward → L1 · closest to the model
- L1 – L2
- Test whether an offer may stand
- L3
- Puts acceptance in a person's hands
- L4 – L5
- Keep the offer and the limits behind it
- L6
- Reduces to rate lookup when signals degrade
How Nestack evaluates it
Evaluate the whole negotiation — not only the rate it settled at.
Coverage runs the whole depth of the workflow, and every layer is cut by slice.
Surface — the offer the counterparty reads
- E1Final-output evaluationDid each counter sit inside the limits in force at the time?
- E2Step-level evaluationDid the agent use your own data, and data of the right vintage?
- E3Tool evaluationDid it read the correct lane and write the correct record?
- E4Confidence calibrationDo low-confidence offers actually attract more desk reads?
- E5Slice evaluationHow does performance change across specific lane types?
- E6Business outcomeHow many offers were overridden, and how many should have been?
Floor — the confirmation your firm is bound by
Failure modes
Where each failure originates in the agent
Seven ways an offer goes wrong, placed at its stage.
Agent lifecycle
Direction of processing →
01 · Retrieval
1 mode
- AO-03
Stale rate basis
The counter is built on an index reading since moved.
Stage gathers
Rate history, lane cost, indices and the limits
02 · Reasoning
2 modes
- AO-04
Ceiling read as a target
A bound is treated as the number to aim at.
- AO-06
Asymmetric movement
The agent concedes upward more readily than downward.
Stage proposes
The offer, the limits applied and confidence
03 · Tool / write
2 modes
- AO-02
Offer sent without a person
A counter goes out before anyone has cleared it.
- AO-05
Duplicate counter
The same lane is countered twice on one thread.
Stage writes
Only where write access and approval policy allow it
04 · Output
1 mode
- AO-01
Cross-tenant rate leak
Another tenant's non-public rate reaches a recommendation.
Stage returns
The offer the counterparty reads and may accept
05 · Change / Version
1 mode
- AO-07
Silent limit regression
A model or config change widens what the agent will offer.
Stage tracks
Model, prompt, authority limits and data rules
- Sev-1 · accepted outside limits
- Sev-2 · outside data reaches an offer
- Sev-3 · basis degrades, offer routes to review
Affected slices
The aggregate is not the lane you are losing on
An aggregate override rate can sit comfortably inside tolerance while two lane types absorb almost all of it. Nestack reports the override rate by lane type as well as in total, so the slice stays visible instead of being averaged away.
Slice performance — reported separately, not only in aggregate
Illustrative example| Slice | Failure rate | Lift | Lift vs. threshold | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Spot lanes with thin rate history | 7.2% | 3.8× | Review | |
| Contract renewals at term | 5.1% | 2.7× | Review | |
| Accessorial-heavy moves | 2.7% | 1.4× | Watch | |
| Committed contract lanes | 1.5% | 0.8× | Normal |
Bar: override-rate lift vs. committed-lane baseline · scale 0–4.0× · tick marks the 2.0× review threshold
2 of 4 slices over threshold
Evidence-linked improvement
The artefact is a test, not a note
Nothing closes because it was understood. It closes when the next release has to pass a case, and that suite is what the next offer made is measured against.
Improvement cycle · five stages
Switchback — the path turns at Improve and returns at Learn
- 01
Detect
Override rate rises in a lane type.
- 02
Diagnose
Offers go back on the desk beside the authority in force at the moment each was made.
- 03
Improve
Changes ship against a version with the negotiations that caused them.
- 04
Verify
A failing case blocks release until it clears.
- 05
Learn
The case is permanent, and the authority limits move with it.
Learn → Detect
The return edge. The next detection runs 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, negotiation workflow, evaluation, integration, then production validation and handover.
Workstream
Week 1Week 2Week 3Week 4Week 5Week 6
- 01Negotiation workflow discovery and boundary definition.Week 1
- 02TMS and rate-source assessment.Week 1, Week 2
- 03Authority-limit, data-isolation and governor mapping.Week 1, Week 2
- 04Rate-history and index ingestion.Week 2
- 05Counter logic and limit binding.Week 2, Week 3
- 06Confidence scoring and desk routing.Week 3
- 07Acceptance workflow.Week 3, Week 4
- 08TMS and rating integration.Week 5
- 09Formation and authority cases.Week 4, Week 5
- 10Guardrails and acceptance controls.Week 4
- 11Offer-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 lane set, one entity | ProductionProduction TMS and rating | AdvancedMultiple entities / regions |
|---|---|---|---|
| Introduced at Pilot | |||
| Countering on your own data | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Acceptance held for a person | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Offer-quality baseline | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Introduced at Production | |||
| Reporting by lane and partner | — | ✓ | ✓ |
| Acceptance workflow in your systems | — | ✓ | ✓ |
| Approved write-back | — | ✓ | ✓ |
| TMS and rating integration | — | ✓ | ✓ |
| Introduced at Advanced | |||
| Multi-entity authority rules | — | — | ✓ |
| Multi-stage desk approvals | — | — | ✓ |
| High negotiation volume | — | — | ✓ |
| Multi-entity authority controls | — | — | ✓ |
| Build price | From $5,000 | From $8,000 | Custom quote |
- Final build price
- Confirmed after discovery based on integrations, workflow complexity, transaction 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 authority limits and rate policy
→Rate-history and index ingestion and limit mapping
Week 102Representative past negotiations
→Counter baseline, limit binding and data-isolation setup
Week 203Your data sources and their vintage
→Authority-limit, data-isolation and governor mapping
Week 104Access to relevant APIs, feeds or exports
→TMS and rate-source assessment, then integration setup
Week 205Offers you would not want accepted
→Authority cases and failure-mode testing
Week 406What the agent is never given authority to accept
→Confidence scoring, desk routing, guardrails and acceptance controls
Week 307Named people who hold the authority to accept
→Acceptance workflow, 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
Each band covers the weeks it genuinely occupies, so the fifth week holds two kinds of work.
Phase
W1
W2
W3
W4
W5
W6
- DiscoveryW1
- BuildW2 – W3
- EvaluateW4 – W5
- Pilot & LaunchW5 – W6
Week focus
W1Negotiation workflow discovery, limit mapping and the boundary
W2Rate-source integration and the counter baseline
W3Negotiation workflow, confidence logic and acceptance controls
W4Evaluation suite, authority cases and failure-mode testing
W5TMS integration, a pilot lane set and targeted corrections
W6One negotiation cycle run under the desk, then Agent Care handover
- Reading the band
- Each band sits on the weeks it truly needs, so the fifth holds evaluation and launch at the same time.
- At the end of W6
- Live negotiations close the validation and monitoring moves to Agent Care.
- Duration
- Six-week plan shown · typical delivery 4–6 weeks depending on scope confirmed in discovery.
Next step · Transportation AI agent
Build a rate-negotiation agent that stops short of acceptance.
Show us your lanes, your rate sources and the limits you would set. Being wrong here is expensive — the counter your agent sent is the rate your firm is held to, and UETA forms that contract precisely because nobody read it.
- Typical delivery
- 4–6 weeks
- Deployment
- Your rate stack
- Person accepts
- Limits you set
- After launch
- Agent Care available
Nestack Agents · Rate negotiation
AGT-TR-07 · Agent Care available after launch