Review before any changeConcept example · confirm availability
Sample records · Concept presentation, not a verified ERP screen.
01 · EvidenceTool-grounded context
02 · ProposalConfirmation card
03 · DecisionHuman review
Why your school needs this
Hasthepersonreviewedtheproposedchange?
Supported tool information grounds the assistant response. Supported writes need a confirmation card so the responsible person reviews the next action.
01Tool-to-model pipeline
Keeptherecordandthereviewertogether
Tool-to-model pipeline defines who reviews or accesses this part of grounding & confirm cards. Start with the relevant request or record, then use the school’s configured responsibility boundary. This does not imply a multi-level approval chain.
Tool-to-model pipeline — Reviewed assisted action
Evidence — Tool-grounded context
Proposal — Confirmation card
For authorised staff
A reviewed next action rather than an unconfirmed consequential change.
Sahayak
Responsibility · Authorised staff
Ask Sahayak
Staff request
Show the timetable for Class VI A.
Looking for a class timetable
Class VI A · Timetable read tool
School information stays within your permissions.
Timetable request identifiedConcept example · confirm availability
Sample records · Concept presentation, not a verified ERP screen.
02Grounding guard
Keeptherecordandthereviewertogether
Grounding guard defines who reviews or accesses this part of grounding & confirm cards. Start with the relevant request or record, then use the school’s configured responsibility boundary. This does not imply a multi-level approval chain.
Grounding guard — Reviewed assisted action
Evidence — Tool-grounded context
Proposal — Confirmation card
For authorised staff
A reviewed next action rather than an unconfirmed consequential change.
Sahayak
Responsibility · Authorised staff
Check the proposed action
Staff request
Mark rolls 1 and 2 absent, rest present.
Attendance draft · Class VI A
Roll 01: Absent · Roll 02: Absent
Review the whole roster. Nothing saved yet.
Review before any changeConcept example · confirm availability
Sample records · Concept presentation, not a verified ERP screen.
03Confirmation cards for writes
Keeptherecordandthereviewertogether
Confirmation cards for writes defines who reviews or accesses this part of grounding & confirm cards. Start with the relevant request or record, then use the school’s configured responsibility boundary. This does not imply a multi-level approval chain.
Confirmation cards for writes — Reviewed assisted action
Evidence — Tool-grounded context
Proposal — Confirmation card
For authorised staff
A reviewed next action rather than an unconfirmed consequential change.
Sahayak
Responsibility · Authorised staff
Check the proposed action
Staff request
Mark rolls 1 and 2 absent, rest present.
Attendance draft · Class VI A
Roll 01: Absent · Roll 02: Absent
Review the whole roster. Nothing saved yet.
Review before any changeConcept example · confirm availability
Sample records · Concept presentation, not a verified ERP screen.
Connected school responsibilities
Schoolcontextbeforethenextassistedaction.
Keep authorised information and human confirmation in the described assistance workflow.
Authorised staff
Understand the request
Teachers
Check access and retrieve context
School administrators
Review and confirm
Before your school gets started
Aclearerworkflow. Aconsiderednextstep.
What does grounding & confirm cards cover?
Keep the response grounded and require review before supported writes. Its documented capabilities include Tool-to-model pipeline, Grounding guard, Confirmation cards for writes.
Who benefits from this workflow?
Authorised staff, Teachers, School administrators. A reviewed next action rather than an unconfirmed consequential change.
What should we confirm in a demo?
Review supported screens, configuration and current availability with your school’s responsible team.