An assistant that knows which information it should use.

An assistant should have a task that can be reviewed: helping a visitor find approved information, helping staff navigate an authorised knowledge set or collecting context for a human support conversation. A chat interface alone does not decide which answers are appropriate, who may see a document or what actions the system is allowed to take.

The agreed work can include use-case discovery, a knowledge and audience model, conversation and interface design, implementation, selected service connections and evaluation. A limited pilot may be more useful than immediately connecting every document or internal system. We inspect the available material and ask whether a clearer website, structured search or an ordinary form could address the need more simply.

For an AI-assisted approach, the brief should distinguish answering, suggesting and carrying out an action. A model-generated explanation is not an authorised business decision. Any proposed account change, transaction or operational write needs its own permission, validation and confirmation design. We do not assume that a successful demonstration authorises those actions or proves reliability across questions the project has not evaluated.

A visitor asks whether a named accessory works with a particular product. The approved knowledge set contains a current guide and an older document that uses a similar product name. The question does not identify an edition. Choosing whichever passage looks most similar could give the visitor an answer about a different item.

The assistant could ask for the missing product reference, show the source and edition supporting an answer, or explain that the available material does not settle the question. A handover can carry the visitor's actual question and the relevant references to a responsible person. It should not invent a compatibility decision to keep the conversation moving.

This example is hypothetical and does not provide technical compatibility advice. The business owns the source material and any product decision. The exercise helps define retrieval, clarification, source presentation and escalation cases for evaluation. It also shows why an older document remaining in a folder is not the same as that document being approved for every current answer.

Prepare an unambiguous question, one missing a product reference, one supported only by an out-of-scope document and one the source set cannot answer. Review the response, source presentation and handover with the business owner. Where audience restrictions apply, include cases that should not expose another user's material. The application and access controls need their own technical testing; prompts alone are not an access-control system.

Repeat the relevant evaluation when the approved material or implementation changes. Record the reviewed version and unresolved cases so a good demonstration is not mistaken for an unconditional accuracy claim. The operating team should know how to report a wrong answer, correct its source where appropriate and pause the assistant if the observed behaviour falls outside the approved scope.