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.
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
AgentHuman
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.
5DecisionSplits at the notice gate
Source recorded and current
Goes to the named data owner to clear.
Anything unsourced
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 required8 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 boundaryAgent 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 accountIllustrative example
Contact
Recorded as
Account
Evidence of record
Confidence
Held for
Named individual, customer account
Quiet since the last quarter
Source, recorded
Vendor feed, 3 August 2026
Held, no notice sent
The named data owner, by name
As receivedBuilt from one mailbox metadata trail and one vendor field, and it claims nothing about the person beyond them.
What the record holdsMailbox metadataSupport ticketVendor enrichment
Why no notice hereTelling a person you hold their data is a call the data owner makes.
ActionClearAppend sourceSend to privacy review
What the score decidesBelow the configured threshold a record gets a privacy read before the data owner sees it.
Value
Where AI adds value
The same four claims, placed at the point in the workflow where each one applies.
Where the value landsValue 01 – 04
Every contact recordFrom the source that carries it
03Evidence
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.
01Approved path
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.
02Human review
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.
04Build 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 calendarMicrosoft 365 · Google Workspace Metadata, not message bodies
CRM and account recordsSalesforce · HubSpot Contacts, owners and account history
Support and ticket systemsZendesk · 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 enrichmentEnrichment vendors · public registers Bought details, with a source
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 aggregateIllustrative 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 threshold2 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 stagesSwitchback — the path turns at Improve and returns at Learn
01Detect
Correction rate rises on vendor-enriched contacts.
02Diagnose
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.
03Improve
Number the change; the records that drove it ride along with it.
04Verify
Nothing releases while a single record case is still red.
05Learn
It is kept for good, and the notice rules are rewritten alongside it.
Learn → DetectThe 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.
WorkstreamWeek 1Week 2Week 3Week 4Week 5Week 6
01Source provenance and automation-boundary work.
02Mailbox, ticket, CRM and vendor sources.
03Source-to-contact and provenance-coverage mapping.
04Contact source ingestion.
05Source, contact and notice binding.
06Provenance scoring and review routing.
07Data-owner clearance workflow.
08CRM and mailbox integration.
09Source and notice cases.
10Guardrails and enrichment controls.
11Contact-trail instrumentation.
12Deployment, documentation and Agent Care handover.
12 workstreams · 6 weeks · bar shows the weeks a workstream is active — several run in parallelFinal 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 tierPilotOne account, one cycleProductionProduction success workflowAdvancedMultiple 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 priceFrom $5,000From $8,000Custom quote
Final build priceConfirmed after discovery based on integrations, workflow complexity, contact volume, approval controls and deployment requirements.
Separate from buildBuild 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 bringWe build with it
01Your live accounts and the contacts each one names→Source capture and notice-status versioningWeek 1
02Representative mailbox, ticket and vendor sources→Source binding, provenance logic and the contact baselineWeek 2
03Your privacy calendar and the data owners it names→Source mapping, notice rules and the automation boundaryWeek 1
04Access to relevant APIs, feeds or exports→Mailbox, ticket and vendor source assessment, then integration setupWeek 2
05Records you would not want traced→Provenance cases and the evaluation roundWeek 4
06What no contact record may establish→Provenance scoring, review routing, guardrails and release controlsWeek 3
07A named data owner who clears the record→Release to the named data owner, then pilot and production validationWeeks 5–6
Nothing else is requiredDeployment, 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.
PhaseW1W2W3W4W5W6
DiscoveryW1
BuildW2 – W3
EvaluateW4 – W5
Pilot & LaunchW5 – W6
Week focusW1Source discovery, notice rules and the automation boundaryW2Source integration and the contact-record baselineW3Provenance logic, notice timing and release controlsW4Evaluation suite, provenance cases and failure-mode testingW5CRM and mailbox integration, pilot records and targeted correctionsW6One enrichment round run under the data owner, then Agent Care handover
Reading the bandEach bar covers only the weeks its own work is named for, and week five is shared by design.
At the end of W6Once the provenance record validates, Agent Care assumes the agent.
DurationSix-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.
