Instruct

The core idea is that you describe work the way you'd describe it to a colleague. Instruct handles the manual execution across your apps, whether that's writing, editing, fetching data, or producing documents. You don't build a flowchart or map fields; you ask, and it works out the steps. That's the whole point.

This is what separates Instruct from a plain chatbot. It doesn't just read your data; it acts on it. After you connect tools securely, it can take context from one app and complete an action in another, which is the part most assistants skip entirely because wiring two disconnected systems together usually means paying an engineer to build and maintain a fragile integration that breaks the moment either tool changes. For anyone who lives in a stack of tools that were never designed to work together, that gap-closing is the main draw.

Any task Instruct finishes can become a repeatable process. Once a job runs successfully, you can ask it to run on a schedule and it turns the request into a recurring workflow. That shift from "do this now" to "do this every week" is where a lot of the time savings pile up. Why does that matter? Because the weekly report you dread writing is exactly the kind of chore a scheduled workflow erases.

Instruct isn't tied to one function. It adapts to different teams, from managing pipelines to filtering candidates, and it executes the specific steps that keep a business moving. The same agent can sit behind sales, recruiting, or reporting work instead of being rebuilt per team. One setup, many departments. No per-team rebuild.

The product frames itself as a digital employee you delegate to. You describe the need, and it handles execution exactly as requested across every app you've connected, moving between tools and finishing the job without you babysitting each step along the way. That framing matters. It sets the right expectation: you're handing off a task, not operating a tool with a hundred settings.