Use a chatbot when the main need is conversation. Use rule-based automation when the inputs and next steps are predictable. Consider an agent when it needs to use approved information to choose the next step within defined limits. The three approaches can work together if each has a clear job.
One Northstar request, three illustrative paths.
Compare three ways to handle one intake request
Imagine a procurement reviewer asks: “Please check Northstar Supplies’ intake packet and tell me what is missing.” The agent in this fictional example can read the submitted packet, current vendor intake checklist, and current vendor record. The checklist requires a current insurance certificate, which is missing.
Scroll horizontally to see all columns.
| Pattern | What it would do with this request | Best fit |
|---|---|---|
| Chatbot | Ask the reviewer for details or explain what information is needed through conversation. It would need an approved source if it is to explain the checklist. | Dialogue, clarification, and navigation. |
| Rule-based automation | Check a known certificate field or document flag against the checklist and route an incomplete packet to procurement. | Stable inputs and explicit conditions. |
| Agent | Interpret the packet, consult the approved checklist and vendor record, identify the missing item, and prepare a summary and request for review. | Variable documents where the next step depends on evidence found. |
The agent’s draft might say:
Northstar Supplies — intake review (draft)
Missing: Current insurance certificate.
Draft request: “Please provide a current insurance certificate so the procurement reviewer can continue the intake review.”
Status: Awaiting human review; no request has been sent and the supplier has not been approved.
The output is useful only if the checklist and packet actually support it. If a reviewer can check a required field directly, an automation may be simpler. If packet formats require interpretation, an agent may help prepare the work, with the person still deciding what to send or approve.
A combined workflow for this request could use all three patterns: a chatbot collects the packet and clarifies missing intake details, a rule checks whether the required certificate is present, and an agent interprets variable documents against the checklist and prepares a supported draft. Procurement still decides whether to send anything or approve the supplier. If the form and checklist make the rule reliable, leave out the agent step.
Choose by the decisions the work requires
Check four things before choosing:
- Is the next step fixed?
- Does the work require evidence from maintained sources?
- Does the input vary?
- Can someone review the output before it affects a person or record?
For Northstar, first confirm whether the certificate check can be expressed as a reliable rule. Use an agent only if variable packet content makes that rule insufficient and the added interpretation can be evaluated.
Rules are easier to trace when conditions are explicit, though teams must update them when the process changes. A chatbot can make instructions easier to reach, but a fluent answer does not prove that it used the right source. An agent can adapt its next step, which adds behavior to test and constrain.
Rule of thumb: Start with the simplest pattern that meets the job.
Record the outcome, the reason the current process needs help, the simplest alternative, the allowed information and actions, and the human handoff. See how to choose an AI agent use case, AI agent architecture, and what an AI agent is.