Draft the response from your own approved rate and terms library, mark it as a proposal in the document the planner receives, and hold it for the named signatory who binds the property.
4Controls appliedCeiling checks, clause-lock checks, acceptance-language flags and confidence threshold
No human action required
Stages 1 to 4 run unaided, and nothing is committed at any of them — the agent is drafting, and the signatory's lane opens at the confidence gate.
5DecisionBranches at the confidence threshold
High confidence
Goes to the named signatory to sign.
Low confidence
Adds a sales-office read first.
Signatory commits
The response is held with its library sources, its flagged lines and the confidence.
Approve · Edit · Send to sales review
Signed — the property is committed▼
6Sales systems updatedOnly where write access and approval policy allow it
7Outcome evaluatedEdit distance, flagged-line outcomes, win rate and clauses renegotiated after a bid went out
Edits
Every signatory edit is counted in the evaluation.
What should not run autonomously
Human approval stays in control
Outside the boundary — human approval required8 items
Committing rooms, rates or dates to a customer.
Agreeing, editing or waiving an attrition clause.
Altering a cancellation scale or its trigger dates.
Writing or amending any force-majeure language.
Automation boundaryAgent acts unaided
✓Draft the response from the approved rates and terms library.
✓Hold space up to the ceiling the sales office configured.
✓Mark every gap the library does not answer, rather than fill it.
✓Flag what a person must weigh, and hold the draft for them.
Any write happens inside the boundaries agreed at implementation, never ahead of a signature.
Signing, or saying anything that reads as signing.
Quoting past the room or rate limit agreed for a bid.
Confirming inventory the property has not blocked.
Changes to the approval limits or the clause set.
Example output
One response, annotated
Everything the agent drafts is attached to the library entry it was drawn from.
Group response output · single bidIllustrative example
Bid
Drafted line
Rate offered
Source of record
Confidence
Standing
Mid-week corporate
Rooms proposed for the requested pattern, subject to a countersigned agreement
$189 per night
Approved rate library
90%
Non-binding proposal
As receivedTaken from the approved rate and terms library — nothing on this side is written by the agent.
Library entries usedApproved rate tableLocked clause setCeiling for this bid
Why this wordingIt proposes and expires; it does not accept — and the planner is meant to read it that way.
ActionApproveEditSend to sales review
What the score decidesBelow the configured threshold the draft picks up a sales-office read before 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 RFPFrom the approved library
03Drafting
Draft from the library
Draw on the property's own approved rates, terms and clause set, and on nothing outside them.
01Approved path
Draft it, a person commits it
Routine responses reach the signatory already drafted and already inside the configured ceiling.
02Human review
Send review to what a bid commits
An internal approval rule the planner never saw does not travel with the document, so the limit on who may bind the property is recited in the proposal itself.
04Build an evidence trail
The response, the rates and terms it drew on and the person who signed stay with the bid.
Integrations
Typical integrations
Five system groups connect to the same agent. Which of them are in scope is decided in discovery.
Sales and cateringDelphi · Amadeus Sales Opera Sales & Catering
RFP and sourcing platformsCvent · Groups360 HopSkip · Meetingmax
Property systemsOpera Cloud · Mews Revenue and inventory tools
Agent
Group sales & RFP response
Reads the RFP Drafts the response Holds for signature
ContractingDocuSign · Adobe Sign CRM and legal review
Break the response-accuracy figure down before you act on it. Split it by whether the planner asked for a clause change and by how close the bid ran to the ceiling The cohorts that carry it are named, not averaged away..
Slice performance — reported separately, not only in aggregateIllustrative example
Slice
Failure rate
Lift
Lift vs. threshold
Status
Bids with clause requests
4.9%
3.3×
Review
Large blocks near the ceiling
4.3%
2.9×
Review
Multi-entity bids
3.0%
2.0×
Watch
Standard mid-week blocks
1.0%
0.7×
Normal
Bar: signatory-edit-rate lift vs. standard mid-week baseline · scale 0–4.0× · tick marks the 2.0× review threshold2 of 4 slices over threshold
Evidence-linked improvement
The loop ends where the next test begins
A cycle closes when the failure is a regression case the next release has to pass. That suite is what the next response sent out is measured against.
Improvement cycle · five stagesSwitchback — the path turns at Improve and returns at Learn
01Detect
Signatory-edit rate rises in a bid slice.
02Diagnose
If it is one bid type rather than the run as a whole, the library versions behind those drafts are read until the cause narrows to one.
03Improve
The change ships against a version, with the bids that exposed it attached.
04Verify
Release is blocked until the affected regression cases pass again.
05Learn
The case joins the permanent suite and the group playbook.
Learn → DetectThe return edge. The next bid meets a suite that just got 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, responding workflow, evaluation, integration, then production validation and handover.
WorkstreamWeek 1Week 2Week 3Week 4Week 5Week 6
01Group sales workflow discovery and boundary definition.
02Sales, catering and RFP source assessment.
03Rate library, clause set and signing-authority mapping.
04RFP ingestion and field normalisation.
05Drafting logic and library binding.
06Confidence scoring and ceiling routing.
07Signatory approval workflow.
08Sales and contracting integration.
09Commitment and clause cases.
10Guardrails and approval controls.
11Bid-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 property, one teamProductionProduction sales systemsAdvancedMultiple entities / brands
Introduced at Pilot
Drafting from your library✓✓✓
Signatory approval✓✓✓
Response-accuracy baseline✓✓✓
Introduced at Production
Reporting by bid type—✓✓
Approval workflow in your systems—✓✓
Approved write-back—✓✓
Sales-system integration—✓✓
Introduced at Advanced
Multi-entity clause sets——✓
Multi-stage sales approvals——✓
High bid volume——✓
Multi-entity bid 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 approved rate and terms library→RFP ingestion and library mappingWeek 1
02Responses you have already sent→Drafting baseline, tone extraction and library bindingWeek 2
03Your ceiling and who may sign→Rate library, clause set and signing-authority mappingWeek 1
04Access to relevant APIs, feeds or exports→Sales, catering and RFP-platform assessment, then integration setupWeek 2
05Responses you would not want honoured→Commitment cases and the evaluation suiteWeek 4
06What a draft may never commit the property to→Confidence scoring, ceiling routing, guardrails and approval controlsWeek 3
07Named signatories to sign responses→Signature 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
Each phase sits on the weeks it actually occupies, and week 5 carries both evaluation and launch work.
PhaseW1W2W3W4W5W6
DiscoveryW1
BuildW2 – W3
EvaluateW4 – W5
Pilot & LaunchW5 – W6
Week focusW1Group sales workflow discovery, clause mapping and the automation boundaryW2Sales-system integration and the drafting baselineW3Responding workflow, confidence logic and approval controlsW4Commitment cases, clause guardrails and failure-mode testingW5Contracting integration, pilot bids and targeted correctionsW6One bid cycle drafted under the sales office, then handover
Reading the bandA bar covers the weeks its work is named in, and nothing else. The week 5 overlap is real, not padding.
At the end of W6Validation closes on live bids, and Agent Care picks up monitoring.
DurationSix-week plan shown · typical delivery 4–6 weeks depending on scope confirmed in discovery.
Next step · Travel & Hospitality AI agent
Build a group-sales agent that drafts, and never commits.
The electronic-agent rule that lets a contract form was written to permit exactly this: formation even where no individual was aware of or reviewed what the agent did. So one question survives, and it is who signs — the named person whose signature binds the property, recited in the document the planner receives rather than in an internal rule they never saw. Show us your rate library, your clause set and that name.
