An AI software request agent takes a software ask in plain language, identifies the product and works out whether it is new, a renewal or an extra seat for something already owned.
An employee asks for a tool or licence.
The agent searches contracts and vendor records.
It extracts users, term and renewal terms.
Tools already licensed that cover the need are shown.
IT judges fit and the buyer decides the route.
The request goes on with its software review items.
It checks vendor and contract records for an existing licence, spare seats or a similar approved tool, and presents what it found to the requester and reviewer.
It collects the details software reviews usually need, such as who will use it, what data it touches and the cost, then routes the record on.
Software is the easiest category for employees to buy around procurement, which makes overlap and unreviewed tools common.
Teams sign up directly with a vendor, so procurement learns about it later, if at all.
A request is made for software another team already pays for and has seats left on.
Several products solve the same problem, each with its own contract and renewal.
Security and data questions appear after the team has already committed to the tool.
Extra users are added one at a time, so nobody sees the cumulative picture.
The agent reads the request and recognises the vendor, product and whether it is new, a renewal or an added seat.
It searches contract and vendor records for the same tool, spare seats or an approved alternative.
It collects users, use case, data involved and cost, filling what it can from the quote or vendor record.
A short brief shows what exists, what is being asked and any flags for security or IT.
The record goes to the owners your rules name for software, and the requester is told what happens next.
Bring a small sample and watch Flo work through it.
| Aspect | By hand | With the agent |
|---|---|---|
| Existing tools | Requesters do not know the company already pays for a similar tool. | Existing licences and contracts are searched and shown beside the request. |
| Licence facts | Seat counts and renewal dates are hunted in contracts. | Users, term and renewal terms are read from the quote or contract. |
| Review triggers | Security or data review is added only if someone remembers. | Software requests are flagged for the reviews the policy requires. |
| Trial ambiguity | Free trials turn into paid terms unnoticed. | Trial and auto-renewal wording is extracted and flagged. |
| Shadow software | Tools are bought on cards and found later. | The request enters the record before the card is used. |
| If | Then | Who decides |
|---|---|---|
| A tool covering the same need is already licensed | Show the existing licence and available seats | Requester and buyer decide whether to reuse it |
| Quote includes auto-renewal wording | Extract the clause and flag it | Buyer negotiates or accepts |
| Tool will hold customer or employee data | Flag for security and privacy review routing | Security lead decides review scope |
| Request is for more seats on an existing contract | Link the contract and show its current terms | Buyer checks the order form |
| Vendor is new to the vendor record | Flag as new vendor and start onboarding information | Buyer decides whether to proceed |
| Request is only a free trial | Record it and note data and renewal risks | IT decides whether a trial is allowed |
A tool looks free but asks for a payment method on signup. The agent flags it, and IT decides whether the account may be created.
The requested feature is already part of a suite the company owns. The agent shows the suite contract, and the buyer confirms the plan covers it.
Contractor use may be outside the licence terms. The agent highlights the clause for the buyer, who decides.
The quote comes from a third party, not the vendor. The agent records both names and the buyer decides which to contract with.
Talk it through with the team. We will map it to your steps and show where a person stays in control.
Start by showing existing licences next to each software request.
Pull seats, term and renewal wording from quotes and compare with buyer notes.
Route to security and privacy review where the policy applies.
Check later spend data for software that skipped the request process.
It shows how often the agent's check prevents a new purchase. A rate that never moves may mean the licence records are incomplete.
Quick answers to what people ask most about software request.
Book a demoIt is an AI agent that handles employee requests for software by identifying the product, checking existing licences, gathering review details and routing the request. People approve and buy.
It reads your contract and vendor records. How complete its check is depends on how complete those records are, which is worth reviewing first.
No. It prepares the request and the facts reviewers need. Approval and purchase stay with the people who hold that authority.
Yes, it can tell whether a request is new, a renewal or added seats and route each on its own path, linking the existing contract where there is one.
Missing information follow-up is the step where gaps in a purchase request are identified and the requester is asked to fill them.
→Requester policy Q&A is the step where employees ask what they may buy, how, and who must approve.
→Duplicate request detection is the step that spots when the same purchase has been asked for more than once, by one person or by several teams.
→A spend policy check tests a purchase request against your buying rules, such as quote thresholds, approved vendors, term limits and budget availability.
→Bring a small sample of real items. We will show what Flo handles on its own and where it hands over to your team.
