AUTOMATED REPORTING / WORKED EXAMPLE
A weekly report you can trace back to the records.
See how eight job records become checked figures, a source-backed narrative, and a report ready for a manager’s decision.
Illustrative design with synthetic records and prepared outputs. No live AI, customer data, calls, or connected systems.
Follow the workflowJ-102 is overdue. J-104 needs a closeout note before its completion can be fully checked.
SOURCE RECORDS
Start with a defined reporting period.
A weekly report needs a consistent cutoff before it needs an AI summary. In this example, the reporting cohort is the eight jobs assigned to the week of October 26–30. Status is captured at 5 p.m. Eastern on October 30.
The source includes job identifiers, status, due dates, recorded job values, and technician notes. Cancelled jobs stay visible but are excluded from the completion-rate denominator.
| Job | Status | Job value |
|---|---|---|
| J-101 | Completed | $1,250 |
| J-102 | Open | $0 |
| J-103 | Completed | $890 |
| J-104 | Completed | $640 |
| J-105 | Cancelled | $0 |
| J-106 | Completed | $1,120 |
| J-107 | Open | $0 |
| J-108 | Completed | $500 |
Read the source notes
J-101 Service completed; closeout signed.
J-102 Due Oct 29. Technician reports pump awaiting supplier confirmation.
J-103 Installation completed; closeout signed.
J-104 Completion status recorded; closeout note missing.
J-105 Customer cancelled before dispatch.
J-106 Repair completed; closeout signed.
J-107 Due Nov 2. Visit awaiting customer confirmation.
J-108 Inspection completed; closeout signed.
CALCULATIONS & AI
Calculate the figures. Draft the explanation.
Configured rules produce the totals. The language model receives those results and the relevant notes; it does not invent a calculation method or decide which jobs count.
AI drafts a readable account of the exceptions. Each factual statement must be supported by a record. A technician’s explanation is attributed to the technician, not presented as an independently verified cause.
Cutoffs, arithmetic, status filters, duplicate checks.
Summarization, phrasing, and identifying questions for review.
- Completion rate
- 5 ÷ (8 − 1) × 10071.4%
- Completed job value
- $1,250 + $890 + $640 + $1,120 + $500$4,400
- Overdue open jobs
- Open at cutoff + due before cutoff1 · J-102
REVIEWABLE OUTPUT
Give the reviewer the evidence behind the summary.
The reviewer can trace the figures to the calculation record and the exceptions to individual jobs. There is no previous-week dataset here, so the draft makes no claim about improvement or decline.
Approval applies to a specific report version. If a source record changes after review, the workflow prepares a new version and requests approval again before distribution.
Five of seven non-cancelled jobs were marked completed at cutoff, a completion rate of 71.4%. Their recorded job value totals $4,400.
One open job is overdue: J-102. Its technician note reports that a replacement pump is awaiting supplier confirmation. The delivery date remains unconfirmed.
J-104 is marked completed but has no closeout note. The manager should verify completion before approving this report.
EXCEPTION HANDLING
What happens when the process cannot continue?
These are proposed acceptance scenarios. A production implementation must demonstrate the expected behavior in testing.
The job system is unavailable at the reporting cutoff
Hold the report and notify its owner. If a last-known snapshot is displayed, label its timestamp and do not pass it off as the current period.
Acceptance checkDisconnect the source and verify that no current report is emailed.
The same job appears twice in the export
Detect the repeated identifier before calculating totals. Conflicting versions go to review rather than being silently added together.
Acceptance checkRepeat J-101 with a different amount and verify that the total is not approved.
AI adds a reason the records do not support
The reviewer rejects or corrects the draft. Evaluation examples should include unsupported explanations and misleading comparisons.
Acceptance checkIntroduce a claim that staffing caused the delay; the supplied notes do not establish that cause.
Delivery fails after approval
Retain the approved version, recipient list, and delivery result. A controlled retry checks prior delivery status to reduce duplicate sends.
Acceptance checkSimulate an ambiguous mail-provider response and verify that it creates a reviewable delivery exception.
YOUR IMPLEMENTATION
What AIR would build and hand over
The example establishes a process to discuss. Your proposal defines the connected systems, operating rules, test cases, and support arrangements.
- A report specification with metric definitions and reporting cutoffs.
- Source mappings, validation rules, and the configured reporting workflow.
- A reviewable report template with source references and approval history.
- Acceptance results, operating instructions, and failed-run recovery steps.
Take the implementation checklist with you
A two-page PDF with review checks and space for scope decisions, owners, and next actions.
Technical references
The workflow is AIR’s illustrative design. These references provide background on the underlying practices and interfaces, not certification or endorsement of this example.
NIST: AI Risk Management Framework (opens in a new tab)Discuss an implementation for your business
Tell us about the process, the systems involved, and what a successful result needs to look like. We’ll work through the scope and practical constraints with you.