Notice a reason to act.
A source update, an agreed review time or an unresolved dependency can bring a responsibility back into focus. The agent checks whether the event matters to the goal and whether the work already exists.
The missing record. The unanswered request. The decision that needs one more check.
Harmony is a private AI operating model for these ongoing jobs. An agent notices what needs attention, investigates it and carries the permitted work forward—then returns until the result is known.
Product activation, employee growth, research, distribution or a new market. See how an agent can identify important work within an assigned goal and pursue a useful next step.
You define the responsibility.
The sources and limits follow your business.
A customer promise lives in an account note. The delivery change that affects it arrives somewhere else. Your team has to make the connection, find the facts and chase the next update.
A supplier moves the expected date beyond a customer’s recorded delivery requirement.
Match the changed order to the affected promise and its account owner.
Check for an existing investigation, compare the source dates and identify what still needs confirmation.
Prepare one source-linked update in the customer’s agreed format, with the unresolved question made explicit.
After the authorized follow-up, keep the same case open. When a response arrives, check it against the outstanding question and update the record.
The account owner approves external communication and any revised promise. The agent cannot invent a date, offer compensation or change terms.
The project is complete, but Finance still cannot invoice. Someone has to find the acceptance record, check the purchase-order reference and keep asking until the gap is resolved.
Authority in this example: request the record internally, send one reminder, then escalate once. Checkpoint timing is set by the team.
The agent sends request REQ-042 to Alex Kim for the missing acceptance record and attaches it to BIL-042. This action is delegated in the example.
Check the sources again and send the one reminder allowed by the assignment.
Escalate the missing record and request history to Taylor Morgan, the finance owner.
Pause further requests. Keep the case unresolved and assigned to Taylor; do not mark it ready or keep messaging indefinitely.
Not complete. The missing acceptance evidence is still a blocker.
A matching record or an authorized owner instruction resumes this same case. A revised follow-up limit needs the owner’s decision.
Alex supplies acceptance record AC-041. The agent reopens billing case BIL-042.
AC-041 refers to PROJECT-041. This case concerns PROJECT-042. The prerequisite is still missing.
Attach the mismatch and request the record for PROJECT-042 within the existing internal-request authority.
Wait for the corrected evidence. The request history and the owner stay attached to BIL-042.
Not complete. Receiving a document is not the same as receiving the right evidence.
Recheck the project reference when a corrected record arrives. If the next checkpoint passes, use the assignment’s escalation limit.
Acceptance record AC-042 identifies PROJECT-042 and its approved completion record.
Match completion CMP-042, purchase-order reference PO-772 and acceptance AC-042 against the example billing requirements.
Attach the source references, what was checked and the resolved exception for Taylor Morgan.
The evidence gap is resolved. Finance still decides whether to issue an invoice; the standing responsibility remains assigned.
The readiness task is complete. No invoice has been posted and no payment is assumed.
The ongoing responsibility can pick up the next completed project. Reopen this case if its supporting evidence changes.
A project is marked complete, but the acceptance evidence required for billing is missing.
Compare the completed work with the contract’s billing prerequisites.
Identify the missing acceptance record and the internal person responsible for supplying it.
Prepare the request and supporting finance handoff; send an internal request only where that action has been delegated.
Recheck when the acceptance record arrives or the agreed checkpoint is reached. If the missing item is still unresolved, bring its owner a focused escalation with the history attached.
Finance decides whether the item is ready to invoice. Posting an invoice, writing off a balance or changing terms remains outside this assignment.
A notice deadline is approaching. Usage, contract terms and ownership are scattered, so the renewal can roll forward before anyone has assembled a decision.
The agreed review window opens for a contract whose renewal decision has not been recorded.
Read the authoritative notice period and identify the current service owner.
Collect permitted usage and service requirements, showing missing evidence rather than assuming low usage means no need.
Prepare the available options, open dependencies and the date by which a decision is needed.
Track unanswered questions and the authorized next step until the supplier’s confirmation is recorded. Changed terms or ownership reopen the relevant part of the review.
The authorized owner decides whether to renew, change or cancel. The agent cannot commit spending, accept terms or discontinue a service.
A milestone looks on track while a prerequisite has slipped. The dependency only becomes obvious when the next team tries to start its work.
An integration test or approval changes near a dependent milestone’s checkpoint.
Connect the prerequisite to its affected milestone and responsible teams.
Check existing coordination work, read the validation evidence and establish the missing decision.
Prepare a feasible handoff or sequencing option within the recorded capacity and acceptance constraints.
Follow the approved handoff and recheck the dependency when the source changes. Keep the teams’ updates attached to the same work record.
The project owner approves changes to sequence, scope or commitments. Staffing, budgets and required validation are not changed by the agent.
A customer or internal review needs current evidence. The previous answers still exist, but their sources may have changed and nobody owns the gaps.
A review approaches, a source expires or an approved answer’s supporting evidence changes.
Match each review requirement to its approved source and current version.
Identify gaps, conflicting evidence and outdated records; assign the relevant question to its existing owner.
Assemble the review package with source references and unanswered items visible.
Recheck the package when a source or owner response arrives. Keep unresolved requests open and escalate at the agreed checkpoint.
Legal, Security or the designated owner approves the response and its disclosure. The agent cannot assert a certification or make an unsupported assurance.
The same request appears in tickets, sales notes and account reviews. More summaries do not establish whether it is one problem, whether it matters or whether someone is already addressing it.
Related feedback recurs across approved sources and connects to an agreed product goal.
Group the source-backed observations without treating a pattern as proof of its cause.
Check current capabilities, product priorities and existing investigations before opening new work.
Prepare a focused question, the supporting cases and the next evidence needed to investigate it.
Add relevant new evidence to the same investigation, revise the hypothesis when facts change and stop when the question is answered or no longer justified.
The product owner chooses priorities and customer commitments. The agent cannot promise a feature or revise the roadmap.
A product fact or policy changes, but a sales deck, support article or onboarding guide keeps repeating the old version.
An authoritative source changes while related guidance still uses the previous fact.
Identify the passages affected by the approved change and connect them to their content owners.
Check the intended audience and existing revision work before drafting.
Prepare a scoped edit with the old wording, proposed wording and supporting source side by side.
Track the review and check whether the approved revision reached the intended material. Revisit affected work when the source changes again.
The content owner reviews and publishes. The agent cannot introduce an unsupported claim or change policy to make the copy fit.
Your team resolves the same exception repeatedly. The individual cases get attention, but the underlying handoff never receives a focused investigation.
Related unresolved or repeated exceptions suggest a question worth pursuing within the responsibility.
Connect the relevant cases and separate observed facts from an unverified explanation.
Check whether someone is already investigating; define the question, owner, budget and stopping point.
Gather the permitted evidence and prepare a finding or a bounded improvement proposal.
Follow the investigation through its evidence and review. After an approved change, compare the relevant new observations against the original question.
The process owner approves changes to how the business operates. The agent cannot alter policy, supplier terms, budgets or access.
A goal gives the agent direction. A responsibility defines the context and authority to pursue it. Relevant changes, unanswered questions and opportunities can start useful work without another prompt.
A source update, an agreed review time or an unresolved dependency can bring a responsibility back into focus. The agent checks whether the event matters to the goal and whether the work already exists.
Compare authorized records, look for missing facts, consult the relevant tools and keep uncertainty explicit. The next step can change with the evidence; it is not limited to replaying a fixed sequence.
Create or update an internal work record, prepare an artifact, request information or use an approved tool where authority permits. For a decision outside that authority, bring the proposed action, evidence and consequence to its named owner.
Wait for the relevant response or checkpoint, then resume the same work with current permissions. Check the intended result rather than closing because a message was drafted or a tool returned successfully.
Product evidence, customer needs, research or operating history can suggest a useful initiative. The agent connects the evidence to the goal, checks existing work and defines the question, owner and limits before pursuing it.
No relevant change means no new report. Missing access, exhausted limits or an action outside the assignment pauses that step and brings back a specific reason.
A response, revised source or review decision can resume the existing thread. The agent reassesses current permissions and evidence instead of treating an old approval as permanent.
Harmony’s focus is the work between the initial request and the confirmed result: investigating exceptions, coordinating the next step and returning when something changes.
Useful when the task is an answer at a point in time. A person decides what to do next and when to return.
Starts with a promptUseful when the event and the action are known. You define the path and how its branches should behave.
Follows a defined sequenceThe next step depends on what the evidence shows. An agent investigates, carries out permitted work and revisits the case until the agreed result or handoff.
Follows the outcomeStart with a single responsibility. The same operating model extends to work within a department, between organizations or around a leadership decision.
Departments, owners and agent responsibilities, with access assigned explicitly.
Work that continues through investigation, decisions and follow-through.
Let partners use selected agents and let your agents use partner services, with a defined scope in each direction.
Decision briefs that stay connected to changing evidence and assumptions.
Bring one recurring process. We’ll map what an agent can carry forward,
the decisions your team keeps and how to evaluate the result.