Determine from the repair whether a calibration is required and which type, pin the OEM procedure in force on the repair date, and draft the record a technician signs before the vehicle goes back.
A repair order arrives — VIN, damage lines, parts list and estimate read from the shop or estimating system.
02
A windscreen is replaced: glass part, bracket, pre-repair scan and sublet are normalised onto one job.
Reason
03
A bumper comes off, so the radar behind it counts as touched and the calibration requirement is determined.
04
A battery is disconnected or a ride height changes — triggers the OEM procedure names, not only crash damage.
05
A procedure version is pinned to the repair date and retained, not whichever revision happens to be live today.
Decide
06
A recycled or aftermarket ADAS part is flagged against the OEM position statement before a bay is booked.
07
A calibration report comes back, and its elements, VIN, tolerances and drive cycle are checked for gaps.
Out
08
A job in a notice state is matched to that state's own duty — Utah 2020 through New York 2025, and they differ.
09
A record is drafted for the technician, and any write-back stays inside the boundaries agreed at implementation.
→Product statement
The agent determines what the repair requires and drafts the record; a technician signs that it was performed and verified, and the shop makes the statement.
Example workflow
One repair, order to signature
AgentHuman
1Repair order receivedEstimate lines, VIN, damage report, parts list or scan file
2Requirement determinedThe OEM procedure in force on the repair date, its triggers, prerequisites and parts rules
3Evidence reconciledPre- and post-repair scans, calibration report, drive cycle and confidence
4Controls appliedElement checks, VIN and model-year match, sequence checks, parts category and confidence threshold
No human action required
Stages 1 to 4 run unaided, and nothing is certified at any of them — the agent is assembling, and the technician's lane opens at the confidence gate.
5DecisionSplits at the confidence threshold
High confidence
Goes to the technician to sign.
Low confidence
Adds a foreman read first.
Technician sign-off
The record is held with its procedure version, its evidence and the named gaps.
Sign · Return to bay · Escalate to foreman
Signed — released to the file▼
6Shop systems updatedOnly where write access and approval policy allow it
7Outcome evaluatedRequirement accuracy, returned jobs, supplement timing and post-delivery comebacks
Returns
Jobs sent back to the bay are counted in the evaluation.
What should not run autonomously
Human approval stays in control
Outside the boundary — human approval required8 items
Performing the calibration on the vehicle.
Certifying that a calibration passed.
The written statement made to the customer.
Releasing the vehicle back to the owner.
Automation boundaryAgent acts unaided
✓Determine from the repair what calibration is required.
✓Pin the OEM procedure in force on the repair date and keep that version.
✓Reconcile the scans, the report and the drive cycle.
✓Name the missing elements and hold the record for the technician.
Any write-back runs inside the boundaries agreed at implementation, never ahead of a signature.
Fitting a recycled or aftermarket ADAS part.
Overriding an OEM procedure or position statement.
Whether a glass-facility notice duty binds this shop.
Changes to procedure sources or evidence rules.
Example output
One calibration record, annotated
Everything the agent assembles is attached to the job it was drawn from.
A shop-level calibration rate can look healthy while a single sensor system absorbs most of the missed requirements. Nestack reports the missed-requirement rate by slice, not only in total.
Slice performance — reported separately, not only in aggregateIllustrative example
Slice
Failure rate
Lift
Lift vs. threshold
Status
Front camera behind glass
7.7%
3.7×
Review
Blind-spot and rear radar
5.1%
2.4×
Review
Sublet mobile calibration
3.5%
1.7×
Watch
Single-system in-house jobs
1.9%
0.9×
Normal
Bar: missed-requirement lift vs. single-system baseline · scale 0–4.0× · tick marks the 2.0× review threshold2 of 4 slices over threshold
Evidence-linked improvement
The loop closes on a regression case
The loop shuts when the skipped calibration is a regression case, not when it has been explained. That suite is what the next job closed is measured against.
Improvement cycle · five stagesSwitchback — the path turns at Improve and returns at Learn
01Detect
Missed-requirement rate rises in one sensor system.
02Diagnose
The car that drove out with a camera three degrees left is traced back to the repair line that missed the trigger.
03Improve
Any change goes out numbered, and the jobs that caused it are attached.
04Verify
The release waits on the touched calibration cases clearing a second run.
05Learn
One case added to the suite, one line added to the procedure record.
Learn → DetectThe return edge. The next miss is looked for 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, requirement logic, evaluation, integration, then production validation and handover.
WorkstreamWeek 1Week 2Week 3Week 4Week 5Week 6
01Calibration workflow discovery and boundary setting.
02Scan-tool, DMS and estimate assessment.
03OEM procedure, trigger and evidence-rule mapping.
04Repair-order ingestion and normalisation.
05Requirement logic and procedure pinning.
06Confidence scoring and gap routing.
07Technician sign-off workflow.
08Scan-tool and estimate-system integration.
09Requirement and evidence cases.
10Guardrails and verification controls.
11Job-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 make, one shopProductionProduction shop systemsAdvancedMultiple shops / makes
Introduced at Pilot
Requirement calls on your procedures✓✓✓
Technician sign-off✓✓✓
Requirement-detection baseline✓✓✓
Introduced at Production
Reporting by system—✓✓
Sign-off workflow in your systems—✓✓
Approved write-back—✓✓
Scan-tool and estimate integration—✓✓
Introduced at Advanced
Multi-state notice rules——✓
Multi-stage shop approvals——✓
High job volume——✓
Multi-make procedure controls——✓
Build priceFrom $5,000From $8,000Custom quote
Final build priceConfirmed after discovery based on integrations, workflow complexity, transaction 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 repair-order fields and job structure→Repair-order ingestion and trigger mappingWeek 1
03Your OEM procedure sources and position statements→OEM procedure, trigger and evidence-rule mappingWeek 1
04Access to relevant APIs, feeds or exports→Scan-tool, DMS and estimate assessment, then integration setupWeek 2
05Jobs you would not want delivered→Missed-calibration cases and failure-mode testingWeek 4
06What no delivery may assume→Confidence scoring, gap routing, guardrails and sign-off controlsWeek 3
07Named technicians and a foreman to review records→Technician sign-off workflow, 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 chart follows the shop rather than the slide, so evaluation and pilot both land in week 5.
PhaseW1W2W3W4W5W6
DiscoveryW1
BuildW2 – W3
EvaluateW4 – W5
Pilot & LaunchW5 – W6
Week focusW1Calibration workflow discovery, procedure mapping and the boundaryW2Source integration and the requirement baselineW3Requirement logic, confidence scoring and sign-off controlsW4Evaluation suite, evidence-element checks and failure-mode testingW5Scan-tool integration, pilot jobs and targeted correctionsW6One repair cycle run under the shop foreman, then Agent Care handover
Reading the bandEach bar covers only the weeks its work is named in. The week 5 overlap is real, not padding.
At the end of W6With the cycle validated, the running agent passes to Agent Care.
DurationSix-week plan shown · typical delivery 4–6 weeks depending on scope confirmed in discovery.
Next step · Automotive AI agent
Build an ADAS calibration agent around your shop's sign-off.
Show us your repair orders, your procedure sources and who signs the record. Who makes the statement to the customer? The shop does — so the agent stops at a drafted file.
