Define where AI belongs in the workflow
The integration brief should define the initiating event, the source systems, the output consumed by the application and any records the feature may change. A case summary displayed in a CRM has different latency and permission requirements from document extraction running in a background queue. Include the user interaction and the required approval points in the design.
Separate model access from the interfaces to business systems. Decide which data the feature can read, which actions it can request and where the application enforces authorisation. Keeping these boundaries explicit makes the integration testable and allows model or retrieval components to change without transferring control of records and permissions to them.
Identify the source of truth and the access route
List the systems containing the required information and identify which record is authoritative. Check whether each platform provides a suitable API, supported connector or controlled export. Confirm account permissions, test access, rate limits and ownership. A feature cannot depend on data it cannot reliably retrieve, or on a licence that does not permit the intended use.
For a Laravel platform, keep model access behind the application's existing authentication and business rules. Use server-side credentials and a queue for work that does not require an immediate response. Agree timeout behaviour, the state retained during processing and how a repeated request is recognised. The application should remain responsible for authorisation, validation and committing changes to records.
Provide relevant information with its permissions
For retrieval-augmented generation, establish which sources are authoritative, how documents are indexed and how retrieved passages are associated with the answer. Evaluate retrieval and answer generation separately: a relevant source may not be retrieved, or a generated answer may misrepresent a passage that was retrieved correctly. Include unsupported questions and contradictory documents in the evaluation set.
Apply permissions before information reaches the model, including any search index or stored copy. A user must not gain access to restricted material by asking a different question. Plan how document updates and deletions reach the retrieval system, and test access with users from different teams. A stale policy or an old permission can be as misleading as a poor answer.
Separate generated suggestions from authorised actions
Treat model output as untrusted input. A generated field, instruction or suggested action needs validation before another system uses it. Business rules should check formats, required information and permitted actions. Do not rely on a prompt alone to protect credentials, restrict records or prevent a change the current user is not authorised to make.
For an illustrative supplier-document workflow, AI proposes an account reference and line items. The application checks that the supplier exists, highlights missing information and shows the source document beside the proposed values. An authorised colleague approves the result before a separate integration writes the record. The review and write are deliberate steps, rather than a hidden consequence of generating an answer.
Design for delays, failures and repeated events
Visible processing status
Show whether a task is queued, processing, ready for review or failed. Staff should be able to tell the difference between a slow response and a task that needs intervention.
Safe retries
Prevent a repeated event or retry from creating duplicate records or sending the same message twice. Track the original request and separate generating a proposal from committing an approved change.
Traceable processing
Associate the request with the input version, model configuration, validation outcome and any approved write. Establish access and retention rules for logs, including when sensitive content should be omitted.
A manual continuation route
When a model or connected platform is unavailable, preserve the input and direct the work to an owner. Define how staff can complete the task without waiting for the automated path.
Test business behaviour as well as the connection
Acceptance testing needs to cover the output consumed by the business process as well as the API contract. Include incomplete records, contradictory information, restricted documents and requests outside scope. Test whether untrusted text inside a document can induce an unauthorised action or change the response beyond the intended task. Check that the application rejects invalid proposals even when a model returns them successfully.
Measure factual quality, source accuracy, review time and failure handling alongside response time and usage. Compare the complete assisted workflow with the existing process. Keep a repeatable evaluation set so changes to instructions, source data or model configuration can be assessed before they reach the wider team.
Make operation and adoption part of delivery
Agree the release cohort, monitoring period and rollback conditions with the application and process owners. Give staff a route for reporting incorrect output and make it possible to trace the affected request. Changes to prompts, retrieval configuration or model versions should follow an agreed review and evaluation process, with responsibility assigned before release.
The handover should identify who maintains each integration, updates source documents, reviews quality, manages usage and responds to incidents. Include account ownership, environment configuration and the evaluation cases needed to test a change. Where MP Software supports only part of the system, document the boundary with the client's team and other suppliers so failures do not fall between support arrangements.
Useful resources and next steps
Discuss the requirements for your project
We can review a proposed AI use case, assess its integration requirements or take on a defined development brief.
AI implementation