Workflow & Acceptance Criteria
The decision, intended users, operating environment, baseline process, and agreed criteria for a useful result.
ETE AI & Agent Readiness Assessment
An independent acceptance review before you deploy or expand an AI workflow. Examine whether it meets your requirements, delivers worthwhile value, and can be supervised and recovered.
A practical starting point
Start with one defined workflow and an upcoming decision. Agree the users, data, permissions, acceptance criteria, and evidence access before evaluation begins.
For example: an internal knowledge assistant for a professional-services team. The scope could examine answer quality, document access, employee verification time, escalation, and the fallback when the assistant is unavailable.
Assessment scope
Scope is proportionate to the workflow and decision. Testing methods, authorized access, technical specialist responsibilities, and a separate review of findings are agreed before work begins.
The decision, intended users, operating environment, baseline process, and agreed criteria for a useful result.
Representative tasks, useful completion, consequential errors, exceptions, latency, and repeatability under the agreed test conditions.
Human review, rework, escalation, licensing, usage, and support costs. Time released is distinguished from realized cash savings.
Authorized data, sensitive information, retrieval boundaries, retention, and third-party handling.
Agent identity, credentials, tool permissions, delegation, and the actions the system can take.
Who sees an approval request, the information available, reviewer capacity, escalation, and the ability to stop further action.
Authorized recovery exercises, access revocation, record preservation, manual fallback, and relevant supplier exit dependencies.
Model and supplier claims, supporting documentation, known limitations, service dependencies, and evidence access.
Named decision owners, control responsibilities, technical review, unresolved issues, and proposed conditions for proceeding.
Model, data, connector, permission, and intended-use changes; monitoring evidence and triggers for targeted retesting.
What you receive
Evidence for a real decision, with the assessed configuration, methods, findings, limitations, and next steps recorded.
The assessed configuration, acceptance criteria, baseline, representative tasks, and authorized testing boundary.
Findings classified by observed results, documentation, assertions, and unavailable evidence, with methods and limitations.
Task outcomes, errors, human effort, and operating costs within the agreed scope and evidence available.
Approval, intervention, access, fallback, and continuity findings, with practical conditions to address gaps.
Material issues, recommended next steps, proposed owners, and what requires additional evidence or retesting.
A concise, versioned record of the findings, open questions, and conditions for the accountable decision-maker.
The report distinguishes what was tested from what was documented or asserted. Conclusions apply to the agreed scope and evidence available. Your organization retains deployment authority; the assessment is not a certification or government authorization.
Clarity starts with a conversation
Share the workflow, your deployment or expansion timeline, and the evidence you can access. We’ll define a focused assessment around that decision.