Use case
IT automation tools that keep review and access in your hands
IT carries the queue nobody else sees: access requests, small tools the business asked for last quarter, and two systems that need to exchange a file every night. AgentCode clears that queue and leaves the review and the access decisions with you.
No card to start · A person approves every change before it goes live
In short
AgentCode is an AI automation platform that gives an IT department a way to answer the small requests it never reaches. A colleague describes what they need, the agent writes the code for a small web application or an automation between two systems, and IT reviews the change before it is released. The code sits in your repository, runs against your data, and follows the access rules you already enforce. The queue shrinks without loosening control over what reaches production.
The problem
The backlog is full of requests that are too small to staff and too useful to refuse, while access requests, integration jobs and one off reports keep arriving faster than the team can clear them.
What AgentCode builds for it
The business describes what it needs in its own words, and the agent writes the code for it: a small application, an automation between two systems, a scheduled job that replaces a manual export. Your team reviews the change like any other contribution before it is released, so IT stays the gate rather than the bottleneck. The code sits in your repository in a form your engineers can read and maintain, running against your own data with the access rules you already enforce. Requests get answered in days, and nothing reaches production that your team has not approved.
What the agent does while it builds
The queue IT never reaches
Every IT department has the same two lists. One holds the work that keeps the company running, and the other holds the requests that are genuinely useful, genuinely small, and never worth taking somebody off the first list for.
That second list is where shadow tools come from. A department that cannot get a small application waits three months and then builds something in a spreadsheet with a macro nobody can support. Clearing the list is cheaper than discovering what got built instead.
- Internal request forms that reach the right team with the information needed to act.
- Access reviews that show who has what today, rather than who was granted what last year.
- A nightly exchange between two systems that currently runs as a manual export and import.
- Small applications for finance, operations and HR, built to their description and reviewed by you.
- Status pages that answer the question the service desk gets asked forty times an hour.
- Scheduled checks that flag a failed job before the business notices the missing file.
Review before release, always
The reason this is safe to run in a large organisation is that the agent has one way to change anything: it prepares a change and hands it to a person. It cannot release on its own. Your existing review process, your required approvals and your test suite all still apply, because the work travels the same path as any other change.
That gives you one control point rather than a new category of risk to manage. When somebody asks who approved the tool finance has been using since March, the answer is a named person and a recorded change, in the place you already record such things.
It also means the quality bar stays yours. The agent runs your tests first, so a reviewer reads work that already passes, and a change that does not meet your standards is sent back the same way any other would be.
Code you can read, data that stays with you
What the business receives is ordinary code in your own repository, not a configuration inside a product you would have to keep paying to read. Your engineers can open it, review it, change it and maintain it after whoever requested it has moved on, which is the difference between an asset and a dependency.
The applications run against your own systems and your own data. We do not train any model on your code or your data, access is scoped to the repositories you connect rather than granted across your organisation, and nothing reaches production without a person in your organisation approving it. Those are properties of how the product is built, and they are the ones your security review can verify directly by reading the code and the change history.
For anything beyond that, ask us. We would rather answer a security questionnaire accurately than list claims we cannot evidence.
See it run
From a description to a working app
Pick a task
Plan
- planning
Files changed
Test run
Pull request
You review and merge. AgentCode never merges on its own.
Questions departments ask
What are IT automation tools used for inside a company?
They cover the internal work that keeps a business moving: request and approval forms, access reviews, scheduled jobs that move data between systems, status pages, and the small applications other departments ask for. The common thread is that each one is specific to your company, which is why they are rarely bought off the shelf.
Can the agent release code to production on its own?
No, and it has no mechanism to. It prepares a change and a person in your organisation reviews and releases it. Your existing approvals, branch protections and test gates all still apply, so an agent change reaches production exactly the way a change written by an engineer does.
How do we control which systems and repositories it can reach?
Access is scoped to the repositories you explicitly connect rather than granted across your organisation by default. The applications run against your own systems under the access rules you already enforce, so the agent works inside your existing controls instead of adding a separate set for someone to manage.
What can you tell our security review?
The parts we can evidence directly: the code is yours, in your repository, readable and reviewable; every change is approved by a person before release; access is scoped to the repositories you connect; your code and data are never used to train any model. We answer security questionnaires with what is true of the product rather than with claims about certification.
Further reading
IT teams normally want two answers. Internal tools covers what the rest of the business will ask for, and building a web application covers the shape of what gets delivered. For the systems question, workflow automation covers the rules that join two systems together, and the pricing page covers plans for a whole department.
AgentCode for other departments
Put the next process on rails
Describe the job once and your department gets the application that runs it. See pricing.