AI agents for HR and recruiting teams
High-volume hiring is a processing problem wearing a judgment costume. Agents take the screening, scheduling, and chasing — your recruiters keep the decisions and the relationships.
CV screening at volume
Fifty near-identical applications per role, each needing a read, a ranking, and a reason. It's repeatable work that eats the hours recruiters should spend talking to the top ten.
Scheduling ping-pong
Interview slots negotiated across candidates, hiring managers, and time zones — a coordination job, not a human one.
Candidates going cold
The best applicants are gone in days. Every day a candidate waits for an update, your offer-acceptance odds drop.
Drafted by the agent, decided by the recruiter — ranked shortlists with reasoning shown, never silent rejection.
- →Screens and ranks applicants — against the role's actual criteria, with reasoning your recruiter can read, override, and audit
- →Drafts job descriptions — from structured role inputs — consistent, compliant, and on-brand every time
- →Keeps candidates warm — status updates and next-step nudges, so silence never costs you an accept
- →Books the interviews — calendar coordination across everyone involved, without the email chain
- →Chases the paperwork — references, right-to-work documents, signed offers — followed up until complete
Candidate data is personal information
Candidate files are personal information under the Privacy Act 1988 — collection, storage, and access all need care, and automated screening decisions deserve special caution. WeBuild agents draft and rank; a human makes every hiring decision, and the reasoning trail is logged so you can show your work. Data stays in your systems, in your accounts. The full gate spec is published on The Cage page — bring whoever owns compliance to the call.
The split is simple: the agents take the repetitive work, your people keep the judgment. Nothing we build makes a decision a human should make — it drafts, checks, chases, and books, so your team does the work you actually hired them for.
No — and we won't build it to. The agent screens, ranks, and shows its reasoning; a recruiter makes every decision. Silent automated rejection is a compliance risk and a brand risk, and it filters out exactly the non-obvious candidates good recruiters catch.
Your existing stack — ATS, inbox, calendar, spreadsheets if that's the truth of it. Agents are built against the tools you already run, not a new platform you have to migrate to.
Yes — arguably better. Volume is higher, speed matters more, and the candidate-warmth problem is your revenue problem. The Optora engagement below is exactly this shape.
Map where an agent pays back first
A Foundations Session against your actual workflows — ranked opportunities, payback math, fixed quote. The plan is yours to keep.
Book a Foundations Session →30 minutes · no pitch · if AI isn't the answer, I'll say so