Agentic ETL Pipelines
Extract fields, apply configured validation rules, hold uncertain records for review, and retain links to the source documents.
View the capabilityFor COOs and operations leaders
Prepare operational records and reports for review.
ThinkStack agents extract information, check records, and prepare reports using your team’s sources. Your team resolves exceptions and approves the results before passing them to the next stage.
The work to improve
Reduce the preparation work for each incoming file.
An application arrives as a PDF, while supporting records sit in a spreadsheet. Someone copies the fields, checks the totals, follows up on missing information, and prepares a report. ThinkStack can perform these steps in a configured workflow and give the reviewer access to the sources and unresolved items.
01 · Inputs your team can access
DocumentsForms, scans, and attachments
Reference recordsApproved tables and datasets
Process instructionsValidation rules and definitions
Prior outputsReports and reviewed examples
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.Data Analysis PlaygroundRun SQL and Python analyses, then inspect the code, tables, charts, and execution records.Observability & TracingInspect tool calls, source retrievals, generated responses, errors, and usage costs for each run.Policy & GuardrailsConfigure and test runtime rules. Inspect which rule applied, the text that matched, and the action recorded.Evaluation HarnessScore representative cases against defined rubrics and compare automated scores with human review.
Defined access · Configured checks · Accountable reviewers
02 · Outputs for review
Validated recordsUncertain values checked by a reviewerReport draftSupporting calculations available for reviewInvestigation notesExecution records for the workflow owner
Where to start
Three workflows to consider first
Choose a workflow with inputs your team can access and a reviewer who can define an acceptable result. The examples below show how each workflow could operate.
01Document intake and validationExtract the required fields and show uncertain values beside the source passages.
- Start with
- Forms, scanned documents, reference records, and your validation rules.
- Agent preparation
- Extract the fields, check them against your validation rules, and hold values that fail a check or fall below the configured confidence threshold.
- What your team receives
- Structured records with links to their sources and a list of items requiring review.
- Human review and approval
- Reviewers approve, correct, or reject values held for review. The process owner approves schema changes and decides which records can proceed.
- What to measure
- Preparation and review time per record, the proportion of records held for review, rework, and the number of accepted records.
02Recurring operational reportingPrepare tables and commentary for a report your team already produces.
- Start with
- Approved datasets, metric definitions, reporting instructions, and prior-period reports.
- Agent preparation
- Run calculations in SQL or Python, compare reporting periods, and prepare charts and draft commentary using the available evidence. Flag differences that still need an explanation.
- What your team receives
- A draft report with data tables, calculation code, source references, and unresolved questions.
- Human review and approval
- The report owner checks the definitions and figures, confirms explanations, and approves the final report.
- What to measure
- Total time spent preparing and reviewing the report, corrections, review rounds, and time to approval.
03Exception investigationCollect execution records for a disputed result or failed workflow step.
- Start with
- The affected result, its execution history, and the issue reported by your team.
- Agent preparation
- Retrieve the tool calls, source lookups, errors, and policy decisions associated with the run. Organize the findings for the owner.
- What your team receives
- Investigation notes linking the reported issue to the relevant execution steps.
- Human review and approval
- The workflow owner determines the cause, chooses a correction, and checks that it resolves the issue.
- What to measure
- Time spent investigating and confirming a correction, plus the number of recurring failures.
Review example
Review an extracted value beside its source
The reviewer sees the proposed value, the original passage, and the reason the value needs review.
- Source passage
- Invoice page 2: “Total due: 1,24O.00 USD”
- Proposed value
- 1,240.00 USD
- Reason for review
- The character before the decimal point may be the letter O or the digit zero.
- Reviewer action
- Check the invoice, then approve, correct, or reject the value.
Your process owner sets the validation rules and conditions for releasing records. Confidence scores help identify values that need review; the reviewer decides whether to approve them.
Pilot measurement
Include review effort in the measurement.
Compare the same types and volumes of inputs before and during a pilot. Count time spent checking results, making corrections, requesting information, and administering the workflow.
- Cycle time
- Time from receiving the input to accepting the result, including time waiting for review.
- Human effort
- Time spent preparing, reviewing, correcting, and following up on results.
- Quality
- Errors confirmed by reviewers and records that require rework.
- Throughput
- Accepted records or approved reports per reporting 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 capabilityData Analysis Playground
Run SQL and Python analyses, then inspect the code, tables, charts, and execution records.
View the capabilityDocument Writing Agents
Review proposed edits as tracked changes, with supporting source passages, author details, and revision history.
View the capabilityObservability & Tracing
Inspect tool calls, source retrievals, generated responses, errors, and usage costs for each run.
View the capabilityEvaluation Harness
Score representative cases against defined rubrics and compare automated scores with human review.
View the capabilityCommon questions
Before you plan the workflow
Can we keep our existing systems?
A workflow can use configured data sources and tools. Confirm the available APIs or MCP tools, authentication requirements, and permitted actions for each system. Writing results to another system requires an agreed integration and authorization.
What happens when an input is incomplete?
Define the validation rules and process for handling exceptions before the pilot. The extraction workflow can hold invalid records or values with low confidence scores for review. Your team decides what additional information to request.
Who can change the workflow?
Agree on who manages instructions, validation rules, policy changes, and workflow publication. When planning the deployment, confirm that the product’s permissions and version controls support those responsibilities.
How do we start?
Choose one recurring task, bring representative inputs, and record the time and corrections it takes today. Set acceptance criteria with the people who will review the results.