Linkence classifies the queue, drafts a reply grounded in your approved policy, and sends only after a person reviews, escalating the sensitive threads instead of guessing.
A shared inbox gets the same questions daily, answered differently depending on who is on shift. The right answer is in a policy doc somewhere, but finding it mid-queue is its own job.
So replies are slow, inconsistent, and occasionally wrong, and the sensitive ones get the same treatment as the routine ones.
The same questions get different answers by shift.
The grounding policy is hard to find mid-queue.
Sensitive threads are not always escalated.
No query syntax, no digging through tabs. The ask is stated the way a person would say it.
The morning queue needs sorting
A classified queue with routine vs. sensitive
A person takes the sensitive threadsA routine question needs a consistent answer
A cited draft reply
A person reviews and approves before sendA reply promises a next step
Open follow-ups with owners and dates
The owner closes the loopEvery answer reflects how the product actually behaves, never generalised.
No. It drafts replies grounded in your approved policy and sends only after a person reviews and approves. Sensitive threads are escalated rather than answered.
Your approved policy and FAQ documents in Drive and Confluence, cited on the draft so the reviewer can check the source.
It classifies them and routes them to a person instead of drafting, so judgement calls stay with people.
We will show how Linkence finds the relevant context, presents the work and keeps every sensitive change under your team's control.
Representative data is enough for the first demo. No production access required.