Use case / Email and file reconciliation
Resolve content, client and period identity before filing. Preserve the surviving record, field mapping, original thread and human owner.
Tensile / Customer job R-104
Resolve identity
Compare content with client and reporting-period context; a hash alone is insufficient.
Preserve work
Choose the intended surviving target with an explicit reconciliation rule.
Apply mapping
Use reviewer-approved field mapping; retain its version and correction.
Illustrative records · proposed experience
Why did a second email create a second work item?
Cause hypothesis: The intake path keys work by email instead of the customer task.
Resolve content, client and period identity. Keep one intended work item and its original thread and owner.
A chat suggestion is awaiting an explicit owner choice.
Confirm creates a local concept link. It does not approve, activate or execute an Evaluation.
Clickable product concept · invented records · no external execution.
A closer look / illustrative case
The same attachment arrives in two different emails. A message-keyed intake creates duplicate work and splits the human handoff.
Resolve identity
Compare content with client and reporting-period context; a hash alone is insufficient.
Preserve work
Choose the intended surviving target with an explicit reconciliation rule.
Apply mapping
Use reviewer-approved field mapping; retain its version and correction.
Retain handoff
Keep the original thread and correct owner with the surviving work item.
Counterexample
Identical file bytes for a different client or period require separate review.
Independent result
Inspect saved item count, mapped fields, thread and assignee.
Correct deduplication includes the surviving record and human handoff, not only removal of a second attachment.
What your team gets
01
Content plus client, period and surviving target.
02
Approved field map with scoped reviewer corrections.
03
One intended item, correct fields, original thread and owner.
Start with an affected customer job, the expected result and the evidence your team would accept.
Discuss a concrete workflow ↗
AI reliability, from production to customer outcome.