Integration
ERP integration that fits the process you already run
An ERP holds the numbers, but the work around it lives somewhere else. There is an email chain for approvals, a spreadsheet for the cases the system will not accept, and one person who knows which screen to check first.
You describe the work · the agent writes the code · your team reviews before anything goes live
In short
An ERP integration on AgentCode is written after you describe your process, so it fits the way your company already works instead of asking you to change. The agent connects to the system you run, encodes your approval steps and exceptions, and builds a small web app where people do the part they currently do by hand. A person approves every change, and the code stays in your repository, readable and yours.
What the agent builds around your ERP
- A connection to the system you run, shaped by your fields and your codes
- Approval steps that match your policy, including the limits per department
- Matching between orders, receipts and invoices, with differences explained
- A queue where a person handles only what the rules could not settle
- Clean write back, so the ERP stays the record and reporting stays intact
- Screens for the people who never wanted an ERP login in the first place
A process from Finance
The problem
Supplier invoices arrive by email. Accounts payable compares each one to the purchase order and the goods receipt, chases the buyer when the quantity differs, and keeps a spreadsheet of what is waiting on whom.
What the agent builds
The agent builds an app that reads orders and receipts from the ERP, matches each incoming invoice against them, posts the clean ones for payment and routes the rest to the named buyer with the difference shown.
What you end up with
Most invoices clear without a person touching them, the disputed ones sit with the buyer who can answer, and the chasing spreadsheet disappears.
The gap between the system and the work
Every ERP implementation leaves a gap. The system covers the transactions it was configured for, and the rest of the process fills in around it: email, spreadsheets, a message to the person who knows. That gap is where delays live, and it never appears on a system diagram.
- Approvals that travel by email and stop when somebody is away
- A spreadsheet holding the cases the system refuses to accept
- Data rekeyed between the ERP and a second system twice a day
- A report assembled by hand because the built in one is close but wrong
Closing that gap has traditionally meant a consulting project or another platform. Describing it to an agent is faster and produces something you can read. For the same idea applied to processes with no system behind them, see workflow automation.
Whatever system you are on
Companies rarely get to choose their ERP freely. It came with a merger, or it was the right size ten years ago, or replacing it would cost more than the problem. The practical question is not which system is best, it is how to get useful work done around the one you have.
- The agent works against the interface your system exposes
- Your codes, your cost centres and your naming stay as they are
- No migration, no second source of truth, no parallel data
- Small apps that can be replaced if the ERP itself changes later
Because the result is ordinary code rather than a configured platform, nothing is locked to a vendor roadmap. If you run a named system, the specific pages are worth reading too: NetSuite integration covers a heavily customised account, and QuickBooks integration covers the smaller finance stack.
Safe by construction, not by promise
How changes reach production
Automation touching purchase orders and payments has to be predictable. The order here is fixed: the agent plans, writes, runs your tests, and then stops. A person reads the change and approves it. The agent never merges by itself, so no edit reaches your process without a name attached to it.
- The plan is visible before any file changes
- Your own tests run against every change
- A human approves each change, without exception
- The code lives in your repository, and we do not train on it
That is a statement about how the product is built rather than a badge, and it is worth judging on the code you can read. Every plan includes the same agent and the same review step, and building a second app does not change the bill: see pricing.
Questions teams ask
What is an ERP integration?
It is code that connects your ERP to another system or to the people who work around it: reading orders, receipts and invoices, applying your rules, and writing the result back. The difficulty is rarely the connection itself. It is encoding the approvals and exceptions your company actually uses.
Which ERP systems does this work with?
The agent writes code against the interface your system exposes, so the question is whether your ERP offers an API or a supported data path. Most do. You describe your fields, codes and approval rules, and the integration is written for that rather than picked from a catalogue.
Do we have to change our process to fit the tool?
No, and that is the main reason to build rather than buy. Packaged tools carry a process with them and ask you to adopt it. Here the process is the input: you describe how your company works, including the exceptions, and the code is written to match it.
What happens when our process changes?
You describe the change and the agent edits the same app, then a person approves the result. There is no vendor request queue in between. Because the code is plain and lives in your repository, your own developer can also make the change directly if that is faster.
More the agent builds
Close the gap around your ERP
Create your account, describe the approval chain your team runs by email, and review the app the agent writes.