Agent enablement & MCP

Give AI controlled access to useful business capabilities.

Make selected records and actions available to an authorized AI assistant without handing it unrestricted access to the underlying systems. Xyloquent scopes agent enablement through approved APIs and, where appropriate, the Model Context Protocol.

Discuss your workflow

Follow this operation end to end

Illustrative sequence

Systems & informationIllustrative workflow

INPUTOperational questionOUTPUTDefined read-only task

Intake tray & registration screen

Inside this step01 / 04

Request details

SourceOperational question

Incoming information—

Required result—

Completing the record

Responsible roleAuthorized employee

Bring the original request into an intake form.

Inspect the record and checks

Comes in: Operational question
Required result: Defined read-only task
Information used: Source identifier · Permitted fields · Update acknowledgement
What this step does: Start with a specific question such as finding an overdue work item, with a clearly defined access scope.
Control: Required details remain visible before assignment.
Accountability: Authorized employee. Next responsible role: Identity owner.

STEP 01 / 08

Ask a bounded question

Start with a specific question such as finding an overdue work item, with a clearly defined access scope.

Comes inOperational question

Passes forwardDefined read-only task

Ask a bounded question. Start with a specific question such as finding an overdue work item, with a clearly defined access scope.

Verify the caller. Establish the caller identity and map it to permitted functions and records.

Select a permitted tool. Expose a small tool catalog. Check argument shape and the selected operation against its declared scope.

Read the allowed record. Return only allowed fields with source references. A tool result is data, not authority to run a new action.

Check the response. Check missing records, denied access and timeouts. Distinguish unavailable information from a successful lookup.

Review a proposed change. If a later scope permits writes, show the exact proposed change and affected record before the decision.

Authorize explicitly. Require the relevant authority for a write. A successful read or natural-language request is not approval.

Confirm the result. Confirm the actual tool result and retain the caller, permitted operation, decision and outcome.

Controlled tool actions / interactive example

Try the permission boundary.

Explore how a tool checks access, prepares a draft and requires a person to approve it before queueing. Change the role or record to see how the permission rules respond.

Acting roleRequested record

01Check access
02Prepare draft
03Human approval
04Queue follow-up

Systems & informationIllustrative workflow

INPUTDEMO-0142OUTPUTPermitted context

Side-by-side verification desk

Inside this step01 / 04

Incoming recordDEMO-0142

Source identifier—

Permitted fields—

Update acknowledgement—

Checks not yet complete

A check is separate from authorization.

Responsible roleCaller + access policy

Bring the submitted record and required reference into the same check.

Inspect the record and checks

Comes in: DEMO-0142
Required result: Permitted context
Information used: Source identifier · Permitted fields · Update acknowledgement
What this step does: Choose a bounded tool to inspect the example record.
Control: A difference holds the work; validation cannot authorize it.
Accountability: Caller + access policy. Next responsible role: Operations reviewer.

STEP 01 / 04 · DEMO-0142

Check access

Choose a bounded tool to inspect the example record.

Comes inDEMO-0142

Passes forwardPermitted context

Choose a bounded tool to inspect the example record.

Changing the caller or record clears the draft and approval. Read access never implies permission to write.

Inspect the decision log

No tool has run.

A viewer can read only permitted records. A reviewer may prepare a draft, but queueing remains blocked until human approval. An out-of-scope record is denied for both roles. This illustrative policy is enforced locally; real authentication and server authorization are project-specific.

Start with a bounded question.

“Where is this request?” or “Which documents are missing?” is a clearer starting point than asking an agent to run an entire department. Define the user, permitted records, available functions and expected answer.

Expose business functions, not unrestricted access.

A scoped tool might retrieve request status, list missing information or prepare a follow-up draft. Arbitrary SQL execution, broad mailbox access and unreviewed external actions are not the default interface.

Keep identity and approval explicit.

Authentication identifies the caller. Authorization determines which records and actions are permitted. Workflow policy decides what needs human approval. MCP does not replace those business controls; they must be designed and enforced in the implementation.

Validate against the chosen client.

Agent-client support, authentication methods, tool discovery and deployment constraints can vary. The pilot establishes the behavior of the actual selected environment rather than promising “any AI, any system.”

A practical first scope.

One workflow, a small set of read-only tools, representative access tests, clear logs and an agreed evaluation set. Writes can be introduced only after their authority, failure behavior and approval requirements are established.

A clearer starting point

Which operation is hardest to follow today?

Tell us where the work starts, which tools it touches and where visibility breaks down.

Discuss your workflowNo complete specification required. Please leave confidential records and credentials out of your initial inquiry.