The AI team

Your Orion and AI workers are not the same thing

Before you hire the first one, it is worth separating two things that look alike and are not:

Your Orion is yours. Each person has their own. It is the instance that talks to you on WhatsApp or Telegram, holds your memory, knows how you work and follows your plan. If someone on your team never chats with Orion, that person simply does not have one — and goes on using Y Managers through the panel as usual.

An AI worker belongs to the organization. It is not owned by a person: the administrator hires it, the team sees it, it is assigned to teams and it answers for deliverables inside the company's work plans. Several different Orions can delegate to the same worker.

The difference shows up on the bill: your Orion follows your plan — that is what decides your channels and limits — while an AI worker is hired by the organization, with its own monthly price. Having one does not give you the other.

Hiring and directing AI workers

An AI worker is a team member who is not human. It has a name that appears on the screens, a role description written by you, a closed set of tools, a work plan with deliverables it answers for, cycles, and an assessment at the end of each cycle. You hire it, give it work through chat, decide how much it can do on its own, and see everything it did in an audit trail.

The place for all of this is Orion → AI Workers Team (the page is titled "AI Team Governance").

Who can do what on this page. Hiring, editing and removing workers belongs to the organization's Admin — the seat goes on the bill. A worker's posture and rules belong to the Admin, the account owner (the Primary contact on the Organization page) and whoever leads the worker's team; the rules of the "Orion (Gerente)" row, which apply to the group replies of every Orion in the organization, belong to the Admin and the account owner. What is not yours to change shows disabled, with the reason written next to it.

Organization without a subscription. If the organization cannot act in Y Managers, the AI manager and the AI workers are paused — the strip at the top and the ⏸ paused badge say so — and nothing is lost. More in No subscription.

Hiring your first worker

Open the page and you find the Hire a worker gallery: ready-made samples, each with what it does, the tools it uses, the integrations it needs and the monthly amount — all on the card, before you click. One click hires. In organizations already enabled for autonomous execution and with a subscription, the AI Manager then proposes its first work plan as an editable draft, and you sign it whenever you want; everywhere else, you are the one who creates the worker's work plan.

If an integration the sample requires is not yet connected on your account, the card warns you with a ⚠️ before the click. The worker is hired anyway, without it, and the screen says what was left out — never silently.

Prefer to build one from scratch? Add AI worker opens the same form you use later to edit:

Name

how it appears on the screens and how you call it in chat — "Marketing (Content)", "Sales (SDR)".

Instructions

the role description. Responsibilities, tone, boundaries. Orion reads this text every time it delegates work to the worker. It is where you write things like "always propose 3 options" or "never publish anything — deliver drafts".

Skills

the tools it may use (Internet, Google, Microsoft 365, Email, WhatsApp, CRM, Relationships, Booking, Routines, Memory, Deep research…). Only what is ticked is available; everything else is blocked at call time. Leaving everything unticked does not release everything — since August 13, 2026 it is the opposite: the worker gets a basic set, enough to work and account for itself. The basics include researching and reading (the internet, pages, this manual, the organization's library), thinking (its own scratchpad, data analysis), delivering (recording an artifact, creating and reading a document, recording progress), accounting for the work (cycle report, declaring a capability gap) and asking a colleague for help. Deliberately left out: CRM, prospecting, email, calendar and delegating to another worker — anything with an external recipient or a contractual consequence only comes in if you tick it. And ticking "Relationships" or "Scheduling" gives it tracking and scheduling, never the reading of your to-do list or of your personal relationships.

Your personal memory does not come in — not for any worker. Since August 15, 2026, the tools that read and write what you told Orion to remember (family, documents, preferences) and your Audio to Notes notes are stripped out of every worker run, including the run of a worker with "Memory" ticked under Skills: ticking that skill gives it its own scratchpad and the reading of this manual, never your drawer. An AI worker is a colleague at work, and a colleague does not open the boss's drawer — nor write inside it. It thinks on its own scratchpad, consults the organization's library when it needs to know something about the work, and that is where it files what it produces.

Since November 8, 2026 the same rule covers two more of your drawers. Your personal to-do list does not open from inside a worker — not even with "Scheduling" ticked under Skills. It can add an item to your list ("review what I delivered") and mark one as done, but it does not read what is in there; if it needs to know what is pending, it asks you. And your personal relationships — who you are losing touch with, the context on one person, the activities you enjoy — stay out of every worker, including one with "Relationships" ticked: what remains available there is tracking, journalling, reclassifying and adjusting the contact rhythm, never reading. The same holds for a routine a worker scheduled and that runs later, without it around.

Integrations

the third-party accounts you connected in Orion → Integrations, released worker by worker. Being connected is not enough — each worker only uses the ones you ticked for it.

Posture

the default leash. That is the subject of the next section.

Hiring a worker is a monthly line item on your subscription, and that is why it requires an active subscription. Without one, the Hire button on each gallery sample and Add AI worker show as locked before you click anything, with 🔒 and the reason written next to each one. Next to the reason there is a Subscribe button that takes you to the Billing page. If the payment is past due, that is the reason shown, and the button is Settle the payment. If the organization is on a pilot or has a complimentary plan from the platform, there is no bill to add the worker to: the reason says so and, instead of Subscribe, there is a Talk to the team button that opens a conversation with Orion Workers support — adding workers in that case is arranged with the team. Hiring also requires at least one person in the organization to have WhatsApp connected to Orion, because that person is the human supervisor of the AI Manager. Without that, the reason says what is missing and shows a Connect WhatsApp button that takes you to Orion → WhatsApp. There is no free path: the team panel's free period gives seats, not workers (free workers that already existed before were not canceled). The amount is on the gallery card and on the pricing page. Reactivating a deactivated worker (the switch on the Users page) or restoring a removed worker follows the same rule: wherever hiring would be blocked, the switch and the Restore button show 🔒, the same reason and the same button.

Hired is not the same as working. A worker that has not yet been assigned to a team refuses any delegation, saying exactly that — and it keeps counting on your invoice. There are two steps, and the second one is yours: assign the worker to a team and sign its work plan. Until that happens, it exists, it shows up on the screens, it is billed, and it does nothing. When you pay by Pix Automático (customers in Brazil), there is one more wait: a worker hired when the authorized amount does not cover it shows as hired and on the bill, with the ⏳ waiting for Pix badge, but it does not work until the first payment of an authorization that includes it goes through (the Billing page, Authorize the new amount) — or until the organization pays by card; if someone delegates to it meanwhile, Orion says its seat is not paid yet and gives those two paths.

Two separate things: the work and the identity

Every worker you hire automatically gets a person identity in the organization — with an AI tag. That is why it shows up on the team screens, can be added to a team and gets a work plan like anyone else. The work record (price, autonomy, runs) is one thing; the organizational identity is another. You manage the worker the same way you manage people, with no parallel screen.

Two practical consequences: this identity does not consume a human user seat, and it cannot be removed directly on the Users page. To shut the worker down, you remove it in Governance — you don't delete the puppet, you dismiss the worker.

And the one current plan per period rule applies: an AI worker serves one team, like a person. If you want the same function on two teams, hire two workers. Trying to create a second, overlapping plan for the same worker is refused, with the explanation on screen.

Giving it work

Through chat, talking to Orion:

• "Ask Marketing to review this post." (and paste the post)
• "Have Research & Analysis pull the 5 biggest players in this market."
• "What did Sales do this week?"

Orion delegates by passing the worker's exact name. If you use a fragment that matches more than one — three workers with "Marketing" in the name, on different teams — it refuses and asks for the full name instead of guessing. If no worker on the team covers the request, it says so and does the work itself, or tells you there is nobody to do it.

The delegation carries the full content (the worker does not see your chat) and the files you just sent. The worker comes back with a report of what it did — and with what is sitting still, waiting for approval. If the approval is yours, the action comes with a preview — the tool and the start of what it carries (the recipient and the beginning of the text, for example) —, ready for you to decide; the whole action is stored, and that is what runs when you approve. If it belongs to someone else, the report only says that it is waiting and for whom. In an organization without a subscription, the worker is paused and refuses, saying so.

In a conversation in which Orion recently read outside content — an email that came in, a web page, a file, a worker's report —, the delegation first comes in a card (Action confirmation — nothing has been done yet) with the task and the worker, and it only goes ahead with your yes: the request may have come from what Orion read, not from you. Because the worker's report counts too, after one delegation the next one in the same conversation comes in the card (details in security and privacy).

When the request matches a deliverable on the worker's current plan, Orion ties the delegation to that deliverable. That is how the work shows up on the plan, where the humans on the team see it. If it matches nothing, it delivers and tells you: "that fell outside Marketing's plan — want me to add it?"

The autonomy matrix

Every action a worker tries to execute is classified by code, before it happens, and sent down one of three routes:

🟢 Runs alone

the action happens. It is still recorded in the audit trail.

🟡 Orion approves

Orion runs a separate review, with a manager's head and explicit criteria (does the action serve the task? is the recipient right? is the content professional and free of invention? what is the risk if it is wrong?), and approves or rejects. If the review fails for any reason, the action is rejected — never let through by default.

🔴 Ask me

the action is held, complete, in the "Awaiting your approval" queue of whoever decides. Nothing happens until someone who can decide approves or rejects it.

The worker's posture sets the default route for each action class. There are six classes and three postures:

In each worker's table you can pin an exception: clicking a route on that class overrides the posture default. "Clear rule" returns it to the default. The Autonomy section stays collapsed when everything is on the default and opens by itself when that worker has exceptions — a rule you can't see is worse than the noise it saves you. Whoever decides a worker's approvals is who changes its posture and rules — the Admin, the account owner and whoever leads its team (see the queue, below): setting a class to 🟢 approves in advance what would go to the queue.

How the classification is done, in code and without guessing:

Known or new recipient

known is someone already in the organization's CRM (or in your personal CRM). Anyone who is not is new. If the CRM lookup fails, "new" wins — the more cautious side.

A message to you

the worker sending a message or email to the boss is a report, not an external action. It counts as internal.

A calendar event

it is only external when it has guests. With no guests, it is internal.

An unknown tool

any tool with no declared classification is treated as "new recipient". The default is to close, not to open.

Two honest notes about the table. Financial and VIP contacts exist as rows and your rules for them are respected — but today no tool is automatically classified into those two classes, because the platform does not yet have a deterministic signal for "this is money" or "this one is a VIP". The two rows are ready for when there is one.

And the exception worth understanding: a signed plan is authorization. When the action is tied to a task or deliverable on that worker's work plan signed by both parties, it runs straight through, even if the class route would have asked for review — because signing the plan is approving that work, and supervision becomes progress and the cycle assessment. Financial and VIP are never released through this path.

The "Awaiting your approval" queue

When an action lands on the 🔴 route, it is stored whole — tool, recipient, text — and whoever decides gets this on WhatsApp:

> 🔴 Pending approval — AI team > Marketing prepared send_gmail (a3f91c22). > … > Reply approve or reject — or decide on the Governance page.

When other approvals are waiting on you, the notice asks for its code instead of a bare "approve": "approve a3f91c22" or "reject a3f91c22".

Who sees it and who decides. An escalation holds the whole action — recipient and text —, so it only shows with its content, and can only be approved or rejected, by the organization's Admins, the account owner (the Primary contact on the Organization page) and whoever leads the worker's team: manager or assistant of the team where it has its current work plan signed by both sides, or of a team above it. A draft, a plan that has not started yet and a plan without both signatures make no one the worker's leader — and neither does the team it shows up allocated to. For everyone else — including HR, Audit, observers and whoever asked the worker for the task —, the page block only shows how many actions are waiting and who they belong to, without the content, and their chat only says the action is waiting for someone else.

Who gets notified. If whoever asked for the task decides, the notice goes to them, as above. If they do not decide, they do not get the content, and the notice goes to the deciders: first to the manager or assistant of the very team where the worker has its plan (someone who only leads a team above it decides, but does not get this notice); if no one there has WhatsApp connected to Orion, to the account owner; failing that, to the Admins — three people at most. Because that action was born in another person's Orion, the notice already gives its number on your list: "reply approve 2 or reject 2".

A reply from your own Orion in a group set to "Always ask me" is a different matter: it is your voice, on your number. Only you see it and decide it — not the Admin, not the account owner. And, since it is from your own Orion, a bare "approve" decides it right after the notice, on WhatsApp, when it is the only one waiting on you; otherwise, say the item.

Whoever decides does it in two ways:

• In chat, with their own Orion: the list brings the escalations you decide, from any Orion in the organization, each with its number and code. Only these replies decide:
• the verb and the item: "approve 2" or "reject 2" — or with the code: "approve a3f91c22". In place of "approve", "send", "release" or "confirm" work; in place of "reject", "deny", "decline", "cancel" or "discard". The number goes in digits or in words ("approve 2", "approve two"); "the second" or "the first" is not an item number — it may be the day or the meeting — and decides nothing. Several at once, each with its own verb, joined by "and" or a comma: "approve 1 and reject 3", "approve 1 and 3"; a pause in the middle (an ellipsis, a period) does not join them — "approve one… two" decides neither. A voice note on WhatsApp counts like text.
• all: "approve all" or "reject all", when the list you saw is still the current one. "Approve both" only when that list has exactly two.
• on its own, only as the reply to the notice, on WhatsApp: "yes", "approve", "no" or "reject" decide only right after the notice, replying on WhatsApp, where it arrives: the notice is the last message Orion sent you (at most half an hour ago), the approval was born in your Orion and it is the only one waiting on you. In the panel, in the app and by voice — which do not show the notice —, or if Orion sent you any other message after it — a reply (the one in the panel or the app too), a reminder, the Radar batch, a summary —, say the item: "approve 1".

A "good morning" or an "ok" at the start, a "please" anywhere and a "thanks" at the end do not get in the way. Anything else decides nothing and discards nothing — an extra word, a "no" in the middle ("approve 1 and not 2", "approve one… no, two"), a "wait", an "I don't know", an account of something ("the client approved"), a request about something else, the number alone, "the second". Two messages in a row, sent within a few seconds, count as a single sentence: "No" followed by "hold on, let me check with John" rejects nothing. Orion reads that sentence as conversation: if he takes it as you trying to decide an approval, he does not decide — he shows the current list, with each one's code, and the right way to reply; if it is about something else, he takes care of it, and the approval keeps waiting on you. An escalation born in another person's Orion — even if you decide it as Admin, account owner or team leader — is decided only by the item (its number or code). The number is the one on the list Orion showed you before you wrote; if the list changed afterwards and the number now points at something else, nothing is decided and Orion shows the current list. If one of the numbers in the sentence points at nothing on the list you saw — for example, a number the notice did not show —, the whole sentence decides nothing, not even its other parts. The code always points at the same action; a code that belongs to no approval waiting on you, or the same approval named twice in one sentence, decides nothing. Each action is decided once, and the verb of each part counts only for its own item. The action runs in the Orion of whoever asked, with their accounts, as if it had been decided there.

• On the Governance page: the "Awaiting your approval" block shows recipient, subject and the beginning of the text, with the Approve & run and Reject buttons.

The rule holds on both paths: an "approve" from someone who cannot decide neither runs nor discards anything — Orion replies with who the decision belongs to, and the action keeps waiting.

And a pending approval is never decided without someone who decides: a scheduled routine, background work or a group conversation never approves or rejects an action waiting in the queue — only whoever decides, through the conversation with their own Orion or on the Governance page.

Approving runs the action exactly as the worker prepared it — your decision is the gate, there is no second check. The approved action runs as the worker — under its name and within what the organization sees: nothing that is 🔒 Personal to anyone gets in, and what only the Orion's owner can do is still refused. If the approved action is refused or fails when it runs, the Governance page tells you it was not run and shows what the run returned; the decision is recorded and the action leaves the queue. The exception is the subscription lock. Approving an action that writes to Y Managers when the organization cannot act there neither runs nor discards anything: whoever decides reads the reason, and the action keeps waiting on the Governance page. Rejecting discards the prepared action.

When the notice of an approval from your Orion is the last message Orion sent you (at most half an hour ago) and it is the only one waiting on you, a bare "approve" or "reject", replied on WhatsApp — where the notice arrives —, decides it: only it, never some other topic in the conversation. If it was born in another person's Orion, or you replied quoting a different message, Orion shows which one is waiting and asks for "approve 1". In the panel, in the app and by voice, which do not show the notice, and also if Orion sent you any other message after it — a reply (the one in the panel or the app too), a reminder, the Radar batch, a summary —, the bare reply does not decide: say the item. A message you wrote before the notice arrived is not a reply to it either.

With more than one decision open, he asks instead of guessing. If two escalations are pending at once, or an escalation and a held send, or a proposed assessment and an email waiting for your yes, a bare "ok" or "yes" decides none of them: Orion shows the numbered list — each escalation with its code — and asks which one, and nothing happens until you reply with the verb and the item ("approve 2", "reject 1", "send 1 and reject 2"). That list counts by its numbers while it is the last message Orion sent you, for up to half an hour, and only for what you wrote after it appeared; if he sent you something else afterwards — a reply, a reminder, the Radar batch, a summary —, your reply is read by Orion in the conversation, and an AI-team approval is decided only by the exact form, checked against the list you saw. With an escalation on the list, the same goes for a bare "no" and for the number alone, and anything else decides and discards nothing. A held send has its card's own allowlist: only a short reply decides it — yes, send, send it, confirm (or yes, send it, ok, send it, send it now) send it; no, cancel, don't send (or no, cancel that email) cancel it, and Orion itself replies "✖ I cancelled the send — … Nothing was sent.". Any other sentence sends nothing and cancels nothing, even with "no" or "cancel" in it — an "ok", a "sure", a "no problem" on its own, "don't cancel yet", "don't send it now", "no, cancel the meeting" —, and the card comes back with the exact answer. A neutral opening — fine, all right, no problem, no worries — does not get in the way of the short form that follows it: "no problem, cancel it" cancels; on its own, it decides nothing. The card only decides while it is Orion's last message to you (and for up to half an hour), and only what it showed: its own send and the ones that went out with it, in the same request, one right after the other — when there are several, the last card lists them all, numbered ("2 sends are waiting: 1) Email to … 2) Email to …"): yes sends them all, no cancels them all (and so do "send the 2", "cancel the 2", with the number of sends that list shows — if one of them was already decided, the plural decides the ones still waiting), and the verb with the number decides only that one ("send 1", "cancel 2", "yes 1", "no 2") — the others keep waiting, and their card comes back right after. The number alone ("2"), a number that is not on the list, or the plural with another number, decides nothing: the card comes back, with the exact answer. If the card is no longer Orion's last message — say the notice of emails that may be opportunities, which asks for a number, came after it —, the number alone goes to Orion in the conversation, which reads it as that notice's number: it does not turn into the "which one?" question and decides no send. Each send keeps its number: the card that comes back shows the ones still waiting with the numbers you already saw ("2) … 3) …"); when only one is left, it comes back without the list, but with the same number; and sends from different requests that had the same number come back each request on its own card, with its own numbers. "send 2" is number 2 of the card in front of you — or of the one you quoted. But if, in the messages that came back together, the same number appears on more than one card (visible on a list, or on the one that came back on its own), "send 2" without quoting decides nothing: Orion only replies "↩️ Number 2 appears on more than one card I showed you: … and …", with the sends that have that number, and asks you to reply quoting the card of the one you want; nothing is sent or cancelled. After that notice, no card has the turn: while it is Orion's last message, only a reply that quotes a card decides ("yes", "no" or "send 2" quoting the card) — and, in the panel, the box's button. "yes", "no", "ok", "cancel", another number or the number alone without quoting — on WhatsApp, on Telegram or typed in the panel — bring the same notice back, and nothing is sent or cancelled. If the send with that number was already decided, Orion only replies "↩️ Number 2 (…) was already sent" (or cancelled), sends or cancels nothing else, and the card still stands. On WhatsApp and Telegram, if the card in front of you has no number (a new send, on its own), the number you give is the one from the last numbered card you saw: already decided, Orion tells you so; still waiting, nothing is decided and it comes back along, with its number. So when the send card has just appeared and is the last thing Orion asked you, the "yes" belongs to it and releases that send (and the "no" cancels it); the escalation, the proposed assessment and the sends of other cards keep waiting, and their card comes back right after, saying it is still waiting. When Orion's last message was an AI-team approval notice, on WhatsApp, the "yes" or "no" is for the notice — never for the held send nor for an assessment you had picked before. If Orion sent you another message after the card — a reply about something else (the one in the panel or the app too), a reminder (even one that arrives before the sentence that goes with the card), the Radar batch —, if the last question was a different one, asked by Orion in the conversation after the card ("Should I book it for tomorrow at 10?"), if you replied quoting another message (one of yours, a photo, an audio, one from Orion that did not come with the card), or if your message was written before the card arrived (it waited while Orion was answering the previous one), the "yes" or "no" does not touch the held send: the card comes back, saying why and with the exact answer, and the "yes" or "no" right after it decides. With a send waiting and no other decision open, a message that is only a reply does not go to Orion — on WhatsApp, Telegram and the official line, for the send whose card is there, and in the panel and the app, for the box of the send requested there (not a routine's send): an "ok", a "don't worry, cancel it", a "yes" or a "no" that did not decide the send get the card itself as the reply, with a line saying that nothing was sent or cancelled — and, if your message could have been meant for another message from Orion, that it was not used for that either (if it was, answer it again after you decide the send). These go to Orion, and the card comes back at the end of his reply: a message with another request in it ("ok, and remind me to call João"), one that quotes a message that did not come with the card, one you wrote before Orion's last message, and the answer to another question that is waiting — one Orion asked in a reply after the card or one from a routine. One question at a time: in the reply where a card appears — or comes back —, only the card asks; a question from Orion that would come with it is held, and he brings it back after the card is decided, only if it still makes sense (the details are in Security and privacy). On Telegram, on the number you connected to Orion and on Orion's official line, replying while quoting a send's card decides that send, even if another card arrived afterwards; if the quoted card is no longer waiting, nothing is decided, and Orion tells you. Quoting the last card of a batch — the one with the numbered list —, yes and no decide the batch it shows, and the verb with the number ("send 2") decides number 2 on its list, as you saw it — even after another send on it was decided. Quoting a message that is not a card (a list from Orion, a photo, a message of yours), neither yes nor the verb with the number decides a send: the card comes back, saying why. Quoting another message from Orion that came with the card — in the same reply, before or after it, or in the reply in which the card came back at the end — does not decide the send, not even with a "yes" or a "no", because it may be about something else ("Your 3pm meeting is still on."): as above, a message that is only a reply gets the card itself, with a line saying it was not used for the send or for the quoted message (if it was meant for that message, answer it again after you decide the send), and the "yes" or "no" right after it, without quoting, decides. Quoting the card itself, an "ok" gets the card with the exact answer — in both cases, even if Orion asked something else afterwards. In the panel, the send that is waiting sits in a box below the reply, with Approve and Cancel, which decide only that send; the batch in the box, what a "yes" typed in the panel decides, the app, voice and the separate box for a routine's send are in Security and privacy. And if Orion sent you any other message after the notice, a bare "yes" or "no" does not decide an escalation: reply with the item. An escalation born in another person's Orion is never decided by a bare reply nor by the worker's name — only by its number on the list or its code.

The audit trail

At the bottom of the page, each classified action from each worker becomes a line: who, which tool, which route, which outcome. You can filter by worker, route, class, text and date range.

Who sees the trail

the organization's Admins and the account owner (the Primary contact on the Organization page), even if they are not an Admin. It carries an excerpt of what each worker used — whom it wrote to, with what text —, so for everyone else, including HR, Audit and team managers, the section only shows a note saying who it is reserved for.

What lands there is not only what happened. A reply Orion decided not to give in a group (because the policy was "boss-only") also becomes a line — explained silence is better than mysterious silence. A send that failed is recorded as a failure, not as "sent".

The worker inside the team's cycle

This is the point that separates an AI worker from a loose automation: it goes through the same ritual as a human.

Work plan

the plan belongs to the worker and must be tied to a team. It is what says which deliverables the worker answers for. A worker with no current plan can still work when you ask through chat (unless it is paused), but its work belongs to no deliverable — and the worker itself is instructed to declare that in its report.

An overdue renewal = a worker that is stopped, paid for and silent. Daily execution — the part where it works on its own — only reaches a worker whose plan is signed by both parties and inside its period. Once the renewal falls due with no signature, it stops waking up, and it stays hired and billed. So that this does not go unnoticed, once the normal reminders are exhausted the worker starts speaking for itself, once a week: "I'm Iris. My renewal fell due on August 20 and I'm stopped, waiting for your signature" — with the proposed period, the deliverables and a personal authorization link for each manager on the team who can sign it; in an organization without a subscription, this chasing pauses. And if the plan ends while the organization has no subscription, the renewal is not proposed during the pause: on its return, the AI manager proposes it with the new plan starting on the day of the proposal, with the same length (the proposal arrives already overdue, because the worker is stopped), and the worker is asked to submit the report for the last cycle of the plan that ended — that cycle does not become no report.

Cycle report

the worker writes and submits its own report (whoever manages its plan can too), starting on the last day of the cycle, like any team member — what it delivered, with links, results, open items and next steps. Once submitted, it freezes and goes to the manager. A worker waiting for the Pix payment (customers in Brazil) does not work — and its report deadline is on hold until that payment goes through, when it restarts in full; meanwhile Orion does not propose a plan or a renewal for it either. If the authorization ends without the payment, it keeps waiting — it comes back when the organization pays the bill that includes it, by card or with a new Pix that includes it. The same goes for a worker reactivated on the Users page.

Assessment

the worker never assesses its own cycle. The system refuses the attempt. The manager is the one who assesses: Orion drafts the proposed assessment (stars + justification), files it as a pending proposal in your "Waiting on you" box and waits for your decision. Once applied, it freezes a performance record — with mandatory justification, as in a human's cycle. Without a subscription, applying it shows with a 🔒 — in the conversation too — and the proposal stays pending.

Two things can happen without you, and it is better to know about both. If the assessment deadline passes with nobody deciding, the cycle closes on its own with a neutral 3★, and the justification says, in so many words, that the manager gave no feedback in time — the cycle is stamped as automatic. And if the team manager has turned on the "Assess cycles for me" autonomy, Orion applies on the date the assessment it drafted itself, with a heads-up the day before and a receipt afterwards. In both cases the screen shows where that rating came from. Without a subscription, both wait — see No subscription.

What the daily execution picks up

an open task from a deliverable in the current work plan, the most urgent first, by the deliverable's due date. That includes recurring deliverables — processes: because a process's steps reset at every lap of the cycle clock, a recurring deliverable replenishes work by itself, and that is how the worker keeps having something to do without anyone asking. The condition is that the process has a cycle clock set: without one nothing sets the beat, and the worker doesn't pick it up. A recurring deliverable is born with the clock on, monthly by default; an older process with no clock that sits in a worker's plan is set to monthly by the AI manager, with a notice to whoever manages the team and a link to undo it in one tap.

Continuous progress

the worker is instructed to record progress at the moment it happens, not at the end of the cycle. Whoever reads "What was done" sees the mark of who did it: a worker's notes are filed under its name with the AI tag. Once the cycle report is submitted, no more notes go into it.

The CLEAR canon, and where it is asymmetric

to enter a work plan, a deliverable has to come from a signed, current team deliverables plan. There is no exception here for anyone — the platform refuses to add it, for a human exactly as for an AI worker, with the explanation. The rule holds until the work plan is signed by both parties; after that the agreement stands, and a deliverables plan that expires does not undo what was agreed. The same goes for a deliverable taken out of the deliverables plan: an AI worker's plan not yet signed can't be signed with it, a renewal that carries it is refused until it is back in a signed plan or out of the plan, and an already agreed plan stays as it is — the worker keeps working on it until the end of the period, and on the Teams page it shows the red tag deliverable outside the team plan. The asymmetry sits in a different rule: when the deliverable is broken into tasks and the plan points at none, the human is warned and carries on, and the AI worker is blocked — the human exception is usually legitimate; the AI one is not.

Cost, removal, and the honest limit

Each worker shows a measured-cost badge: how much it consumed in the current month and over the last 7 days, with the number of runs. Until there is a measured run, the screen says "no measured activity yet" instead of showing zero — no measurement is not the same as no work. Orion (the manager) appears in the list as a line of its own: management costs something, and its cost is spread across the workers' prices.

Each worker has a usage allowance of its own. Since August 13, 2026, what a worker spends does not come out of your personal allowance for talking to Orion, nor out of the organization's management allowance: each worker has an account of its own, with one cap per day and another per month. That is what makes the cost badge comparable between them. If the day's allowance runs out, the delegation is refused saying the worker's name and the cause, the work is not lost (it picks up again when the day turns) and the Admins are notified. In an organization without a subscription, it is paused and refuses without spending its allowance.

Remove — only the organization's Admin — deactivates the worker immediately: it stops acting, its pending approvals are canceled and the audit history is kept.

And the limit: daily autonomous execution — the worker waking up every day, pulling the next task from the plan and working without anyone asking — is in gradual rollout, enabled organization by organization. Outside of it, the worker works when Orion delegates (at your request or through a routine you created) — and, in an organization without a subscription, it is paused. Hiring, scope, the autonomy matrix, escalations, the work plan and the audit trail all hold from day one; the automatic cycle report and the manager's proposed assessment arrive with that same enablement.

WhatsApp and Telegram groups

Groups have a chapter of their own: WhatsApp and Telegram groups — where they are on the screen, participation and category (two separate switches), how Orion is called, each group's policy, who can ask for what and what is kept.