How an AI agent can prepare a spend review queue with evidence and owner questions
This workflow gives an AI agent a defined job, a bounded set of records, and a result a person can review. The agent reads the relevant Brex context, applies the rules in the prompt, and keeps the source behind every recommendation. It returns a proposed handoff rather than taking consequential actions on its own.
Can an AI agent prepare a spend review queue with evidence and owner questions?
Yes. Start with the scope, date range, decision rules, and fields that identify the right records. The agent can collect the evidence, compare states or sources, mark conflicts and missing data, and organize the result around the outcome above. A reviewer then checks the matches and judgment calls before approving messages, record updates, bookings, purchases, publishing, or other write actions. The guide below shows the records, boundaries, prompt, and handoff needed for this specific workflow.
Turn policy into review rules
Provide the date range, card or account scope, current policy, receipt threshold, allowed categories, merchant restrictions, and approved exceptions. Ask the agent to cite the transaction and policy section behind every flag.
Separate missing evidence from suspected noncompliance. A transaction can need a receipt or business purpose without being out of policy. Likewise, an approved exception should remain visible rather than being flagged repeatedly.
Example starter prompt
Review Brex transactions for [accounts/cards] between [dates] against policy [link and version]. Apply these rules: [rules and approved exceptions].
For each item needing review, include transaction ID, date, merchant, amount, cardholder, available receipt and memo, policy reference, observed issue, and one precise owner question. Group missing evidence, apparent policy exceptions, duplicate candidates, and unusual activity separately. Do not message users or change cards.Review false positives
Merchant names can be ambiguous, currencies can change the apparent amount, and a single invoice can produce several legitimate charges. Check available receipt, memo, cardholder, location, and prior exception context before escalating. The agent should say which evidence it could not access.
Questions this workflow answers
Which card transactions need a finance review, and what exactly should we ask the cardholder?
An agent can apply a written expense policy to a defined transaction set and produce focused questions instead of a list of suspicious-looking charges. Give it the card or account scope, period, policy version, receipt and memo requirements, merchant or category restrictions, amount thresholds, and approved exceptions. It records the transaction ID, merchant, amount, currency, cardholder, available evidence, and policy clause behind every flag.
Findings should describe what is observable. A missing receipt is a missing receipt, not proof that the purchase was improper. A weekend transaction or unfamiliar merchant may deserve context without implying misconduct. Currency conversion, delayed settlement, split invoices, recurring subscriptions, and merchant descriptors can all create false positives. The agent checks available receipt, memo, location, prior transactions, and exception records before it writes a question.
Each question should tell the owner what will resolve the item. “Please explain” is weak. Better questions ask for the receipt for a named transaction, the business purpose tied to a project, confirmation that two charges cover separate invoices, or the approver for an exception. The queue can separate missing evidence, apparent policy exception, possible duplicate, and unusual activity so finance handles each category with the right process.
Reviewers sample low and high severity rows to verify that the policy logic is consistent. They also inspect cleared items so an overbroad exception does not hide real work. Card freezes, disputes, employee messages, and reimbursement decisions stay outside the analysis and require authorized approval. The recurring-issues summary may show that one merchant descriptor confuses the rule or one team repeatedly lacks a project code, giving finance a process fix instead of a permanent stream of individual flags.
Expected handoff
Return a review table with evidence, rule, severity, question, owner, and due date, plus a summary of recurring issues. Put card controls, transaction disputes, and employee messages in a separate approval section.