Conceptual illustration of defining the parts of a custom software project.
A custom software project is easier to assess when the brief describes the work that needs to change. Instead of beginning with a long feature list, start with a task, the people involved and the result they need. This makes it possible to judge whether automation can help.
NEO Labs includes custom software and AI automation in its service offering. A useful discussion with an engineering team should establish scope and dependencies before treating any platform capability or integration as part of the agreed delivery.
Describe the workflow as it happens today
For an illustrative purchase request process, record how a request arrives, who checks it and what happens before it is approved. Include the spreadsheet, document or system that each person uses. A missing budget reference may matter more than the number of messages exchanged.
Bring examples that show the normal case and a difficult exception. Remove information that is unnecessary for the project discussion. The purpose is to expose the actual sequence of work, including waiting periods and repeated corrections, so the team can identify where a change would help.
Define the smallest useful deliverable
The first version might collect required fields and prepare a review record for the purchasing team. It does not need to include every supplier category, payment step or reporting view. The scope should be large enough to complete a useful task and small enough to evaluate.
Write down what completion means. For this example, each request could require a named owner, an amount, a budget reference and attached evidence. If any item is missing, the software should show the issue and direct the request back for clarification. This is a testable behaviour.
Acceptance criteria make the intended deliverable concrete.
Identify integrations and limits
A proposed connection to an existing system needs more detail than its product name. Establish whether it provides the required data, which account can access it and what operations are permitted. Access to read a purchase record should not be assumed to include authority to approve or pay it.
Include a route for connection failures and unavailable data. A project estimate should distinguish work the engineering team can control from dependencies on the client or an external provider. A blocked integration may require a different first version rather than a silent reduction in functionality.
Place AI where interpretation is useful
AI could help summarise the reason for a request or extract information from a supporting document. Deterministic rules can check whether required fields are present. Use each approach for the part of the workflow it can handle and preserve a person’s decision where judgement is required.
Specify how an AI output will be reviewed. The purchasing team should see the source material and be able to correct the summary. The accepted record should retain the correction. Repeated errors should become evidence for improving the workflow rather than being hidden by a confident presentation.
Agree acceptance and operating ownership
Test the deliverable with representative requests, including an incomplete submission and a changed budget reference. Compare the output with the agreed criteria. A review should consider the work needed to correct the result as well as the time spent preparing it.
Before release, name the owner for access changes, support and future revisions. Agree how scope changes are assessed and how a failed update can be reversed. A practical brief can fit on a few pages if it includes the current task, sample inputs and a concrete definition of success.
Explore NEO Labs or contact My NEO Group with a sample workflow, the systems involved and the result you want the first version to deliver.
