Stop at search if users can find the permitted, current material they need. Add grounded answers when they need a supported explanation of that material. Add actions only when the workflow must change a business system and the application can enforce permissions and required approvals. Test each outcome separately to identify the layer the team needs.
Key takeaways
- Test discovery, answers, and actions separately: each adds a different responsibility.
- Check evidence and user access: answers need supporting passages and current permissions.
- Control actions through the application: retrieved text does not grant permission or approval.
Start with a search task that already matters
Choose an approved, repeatable question, such as finding the current equipment-return procedure. Record where the information lives, who owns it, and which users can access it. Confirm that the current search route returns the relevant source before introducing answer generation.
A connected-search product's supported repositories and permission behavior are part of this baseline. Consult the selected connector's documentation, such as Glean's connector guide, then test the actual source and user roles.
Define what changes at each layer
| Layer | Accepted output | Extra responsibility to test |
|---|---|---|
| Search | Relevant, permitted source material | Coverage, ranking, access, and source freshness |
| Grounded answer | A response supported by the accepted source | Citation support, omitted conditions, conflicting evidence, and insufficient-evidence behavior |
| Agent action | A permitted operation with an observable result | Verified identity, tool authorization, approval where required, and result reconciliation |
Keep those outcomes separate in the scorecard. A fluent answer can still cite an outdated procedure, and a correct procedure can still be insufficient authority for an external action.
Run one question through the handoff
First ask the user to locate the procedure. Then ask the answering layer to explain the required steps with supporting passages. Review dates, covered groups, exceptions, and any instruction that the source leaves ambiguous.
Use an approved test copy of the procedure and a synthetic account. Change the copy, record the expected propagation window, and check a cached answer and a new request. Then revoke the account's access and repeat both checks through the real application path. The NIST AI RMF Playbook provides broader evaluation context; set expected results from your workflow and access policy.
Add an action only when the task needs one
If the workflow opens a service ticket, define who may request it, which tool and fields are allowed, and whether approval is required. Keep the ticket identifier and final result as evidence of completion. Use synthetic records to test repeated or interrupted requests; if a response is lost, check whether the ticket already exists before repeating the request. Test that a retrieved document cannot authorize a ticket action: application and user permissions, plus any required approval, determine whether it can proceed.
When Seahorse fits
Seahorse Cloud offers document RAG and managed agents with MCP tool integration, a fit to assess when a project includes document preparation, retrieval, and agent workflows—not just cross-application search.
Its product page lists on-premise installation and SaaS subscription; confirm the deployment and operating responsibilities for the proposal. MCP defines authorization mechanisms for supported transports (authorization specification), but application-specific action permissions and approvals remain the team's responsibility.
Choose the next layer
Use search when it satisfies the task. Add grounded answers when they improve the result. Add an action only when its permission and result checks pass.