Agentic ETL Pipelines
Extract fields, apply configured validation rules, hold uncertain records for review, and retain links to the source documents.
View the capabilityThinkStack for faster expert review
Shorten the wait for expert review.
Documents, cases, and submissions sit in a queue while experts read, sort, and draft before they can decide. ThinkStack agents prepare the packet from your approved sources, so reviewers start with the evidence organized and spend their time on judgment.
The work to improve
Find where the time goes before the decision.
In many regulated processes the expert's judgment takes minutes and the waiting takes weeks. Files arrive unsorted. Someone assembles the evidence, checks it against a checklist, and writes a first version before a qualified reviewer can decide anything. Agents can do that preparation in a defined workflow, with every source open to inspection.
01 · Inputs your team can access
Incoming filesApplications, cases, submissions, and attachments
Approved referencesPolicies, checklists, and prior decisions
Review rulesRequired fields, thresholds, and escalation paths
Reviewer rosterWho reviews what, and who approves
ThinkStack
Configured agents, tools, and workflow steps
Agentic ETL PipelinesExtract fields, apply configured validation rules, hold uncertain records for review, and retain links to the source documents.Flow OrchestratorDefine the sequence of steps, tool calls, inputs, and outputs for a repeatable workflow.Enterprise SearchRetrieve relevant passages from connected information within the configured permissions.Document Writing AgentsReview proposed edits as tracked changes, with supporting source passages, author details, and revision history.Evaluation HarnessScore representative cases against defined rubrics and compare automated scores with human review.Observability & TracingInspect tool calls, source retrievals, generated responses, errors, and usage costs for each run.
Defined access · Configured checks · Accountable reviewers
02 · Outputs for review
Triaged queueFiles sorted, summarized, and flaggedPrepared draftRoutine sections with source referencesReview recordDecisions and edits kept with the file
Where to start
Three places to start
Choose one queue where the backlog is visible and a reviewer can describe an acceptable prepared file. These examples show the pattern; scope, systems, and review roles depend on your configuration.
01Intake triage and routingSort incoming files and send each one to the right reviewer.
- Start with
- Incoming files, your classification rules, and the reviewer roster.
- Agent preparation
- Read each file, extract the fields reviewers need, flag missing information, and propose a category and priority. Hold uncertain files for a person.
- What your team receives
- A sorted queue with a short summary and the reason for each proposed category.
- Human review and approval
- A named reviewer confirms or changes the category. The process owner sets the rules and the thresholds for routing.
- What to measure
- Time from arrival to a reviewer opening the file, and how often reviewers change the proposed category.
02First-draft preparationDraft the routine sections from approved sources before the reviewer starts.
- Start with
- The file, approved reference documents, and your template.
- Agent preparation
- Retrieve the relevant passages and propose draft text with a source reference beside each statement. Keep the original text for comparison.
- What your team receives
- A draft in tracked changes, with the supporting passages visible.
- Human review and approval
- The reviewer accepts, edits, or rejects each suggestion. Author details and revision history stay with the document.
- What to measure
- Reviewer time per file, share of suggestions accepted unchanged, and corrections per draft.
03Backlog and bottleneck reportingShow where files wait, stage by stage.
- Start with
- Workflow records for a sample period and the stages you want to compare.
- Agent preparation
- Calculate the time files spend in each stage and prepare a short report with the code and tables behind each figure.
- What your team receives
- A stage-by-stage view of waiting time, with the calculations open to inspection.
- Human review and approval
- The operations owner checks the definitions and decides which stage to change first.
- What to measure
- Time in each stage before and during a pilot, using the same file types and volumes.
Review example
Review a draft section beside its source
The reviewer sees the proposed text, the passage it came from, and the reason the draft needs a person's attention.
- Source passage
- Policy 4.2: "Applicants must provide proof of address dated within 90 days."
- Proposed text
- Proof of address is required and must be dated within 90 days of the application.
- Reason for review
- The submitted statement is dated 112 days before the application.
- Reviewer action
- Request a newer document, or record an approved exception.
Your process owner sets the rules, the exceptions, and who may approve them. The agent proposes; the reviewer decides.
Pilot measurement
Measure the whole cycle, including review.
Compare the same file types and volumes before and during a pilot. Count the time reviewers spend checking and correcting the prepared work, not only the time the agent saves.
- Cycle time
- Time from arrival to a recorded decision.
- Reviewer effort
- Time spent reading, checking, correcting, and deciding.
- Quality
- Errors and omissions found by a later check or a reviewer.
- Backlog
- Files waiting at each stage over the pilot period.
Platform capabilities
The modules behind these workflows
Review the relevant capabilities with your technical team and confirm the configuration for the intended use.
Flow Orchestrator
Define the sequence of steps, tool calls, inputs, and outputs for a repeatable workflow.
View the capabilityDocument Writing Agents
Review proposed edits as tracked changes, with supporting source passages, author details, and revision history.
View the capabilityEnterprise Search
Retrieve relevant passages from connected information within the configured permissions.
View the capabilityData Analysis Playground
Run SQL and Python analyses, then inspect the code, tables, charts, and execution records.
View the capabilityObservability & Tracing
Inspect tool calls, source retrievals, generated responses, errors, and usage costs for each run.
View the capabilityRelated
Explore related pages
See how this outcome connects to the work of other teams and industries.
Common questions
Before you plan the workflow
Does this replace our reviewers?
No. Agents prepare the packet and reviewers keep the decision. Whether a reviewer needs less time depends on the quality of the prepared file, and you measure that in a pilot.
What if the agent is wrong?
Uncertain or conflicting items are held for a person, and every suggestion shows its source so reviewers can check it. Corrections count toward the pilot, so a prepared file that costs more time to fix than it saves is visible.
Which process should we start with?
A recurring review with a visible backlog, documents your team is permitted to use, a clear checklist, and a reviewer who can say what "ready" looks like.
How do we start?
Choose one queue and agree on representative files, the baseline, and the acceptance criteria. We will map the sources, the review steps, and where approved results go in your existing systems.