append-only
Full decision trail
Restatement, classification, sources, action, authorizing rule, and verification on every ticket.
// industries / fintech
In a regulated environment the question about AI automation is never "can it?" — it is "can you prove what it did, and could you have stopped it?" Most AI support tooling answers the first question well and the second one poorly.
FlowTux is built the other way round: the AI acts only inside an explicit allow-list, every decision and action lands on the ticket timeline with the rule that authorized it, and the categories that carry compliance weight stay human by design.
A record that says "resolved by AI" cannot answer the question anyone actually asks.
When a reviewer asks about an automated action, they want the reasoning: what was requested, how it was classified and with what confidence, which sources informed it, what was done, under which rule, and how it was verified. A log that records only the outcome forces a reconstruction.
Every FlowTux ticket carries that chain on its timeline, visible to the team rather than buried in an admin console — which is also what makes automation socially acceptable internally, not just defensible externally.
A category nobody considered is automatically human-handled, not automatically automated.
A deny-list — automate everything except a named set — means every category you did not think of becomes fair game. In a regulated environment that is the wrong default. An allow-list inverts it: the AI resolves autonomously only inside an explicitly permitted set, and anything unlisted is triaged and handed to a person.
Compliance-scoped access grants, anything touching payments or customer funds, and irreversible operations stay off the list permanently, regardless of how confident the model is. The test is asymmetry: routine slowness is annoying, a wrong action is a finding.
Choose where data lives; keep the queue’s visibility rules aligned with the org’s.
Data residency is selectable at signup across the EU, the US, and India, and the security posture is documented rather than asserted. Ticket visibility follows the source’s own permissions — a request raised in a restricted channel does not become readable by people who could not see the original.
append-only
Restatement, classification, sources, action, authorizing rule, and verification on every ticket.
allow-listed
Autonomous action only inside an explicit permitted set; everything else routes to a human.
Compliance-scoped and irreversible categories stay human regardless of confidence.
Per-priority clocks from ticket creation, with escalation when targets are at risk.
EU, US, or India, selected at signup.
Ticket access follows the permissions of the channel or source it came from.
Choose your data region
EU, US, or India at signup.
Write the allow-list and the never-list
Both explicitly, before enabling any autonomous action.
Verify one action end to end
Confirm the timeline record satisfies your reviewer before rollout.
Promote categories slowly
Suggest, then approve, then autonomous — per category, on measured agreement.
It can be, given two properties: actions restricted to an explicit allow-list so unconsidered categories default to human handling, and a complete decision trail on every ticket — classification, sources, action, authorizing rule, and verification. Compliance-scoped and irreversible categories should stay human regardless of model confidence.
For each AI action: the restated request, the classification with confidence, the sources consulted, the action taken and the allow-list rule authorizing it, the verification result, and which model version acted — on the ticket timeline where the team can see it.
Data residency is selectable across the EU, the US, and India at signup. See the security page for the current documented posture and sub-processor information.
14-day free trial. Every team up and running the same day.
No credit card. No sales call. No implementation consultant.