JustHandled Labs
// Productivity

Should This Be Automated?

Classify a consequential people-facing action as suitable for automation, revision, delay, human review, human delivery, or no automation.

What problem does Should This Be Automated? solve?

Classify a consequential people-facing action as suitable for automation, revision, delay, human review, human delivery, or no automation.

Use it to

What it returns

A representative input and result

fixture-backed sample
input A billing agent plans to publicly flag a disputed account and freeze access without an appeal path.
result verdict: do_not_automate confidence: limited observations: [directly supplied facts] alternative_explanations: [at least one] recommended_action: reversible next step human_review: explicit when stakes or authority require it

Access and approval boundaries

Known limitations

Questions

Can it know what another person feels or intends?

No. It separates observations from calibrated hypotheses and alternative explanations.

Does it diagnose manipulation, abuse, attachment, or mental health?

No. It refuses diagnosis and does not turn communication patterns into claims about a person.

Can it send, publish, or act for me?

No. It returns decision support or a draft only and performs no external action.

What happens in a high-stakes case?

It lowers certainty, avoids authorization, and recommends an accountable qualified human when appropriate.

Does a benign case always escalate?

No. The contract requires proportionality and includes benign regressions specifically to prevent reflexive handoff.

Are the tests proof that people will react well?

No. They verify package and safety contracts, not human reaction, legal sufficiency, or semantic perfection.

Should This Be Automated? keeps proof and approval boundaries visible.

The listing includes the tested package, realistic samples, declared permissions, and known limitations.

Get Should This Be Automated? on Agensi