Which quote should your AI assistant use?

Write down which version is valid

Before opening the assistant, write a short rule: use the revision that the responsible person has approved for customer communication. Keep that internal approval separate from the customer accepting a quote. A newer file date does not authorize a change to the terms.

A worked example: the newer file is still a draft

Everything in this exercise is fictional: the job, documents, amounts and approvals. These are contents to recreate in a sample folder, not linked customer files or an observed Gemini result. The request is: “Please confirm the latest equipment price and transport for our event on 11 October.” Use job reference EV-DEMO-021.

The sample folder contains six records. Give each one the short source label below so another person can follow the review.

• S1, EV-DEMO-021-r01.pdf, 16 September: superseded quote for 10 October, with transport included.
• S2, EV-DEMO-021-r02.pdf, 18 September: equipment and setup €1,800 before VAT for the proposed 11 October event. Transport is not priced in that amount and remains pending. Date and availability are not confirmed.
• S3, EV-DEMO-021-r03-draft.docx, 20 September: unapproved draft showing €1,650 before VAT and transport included. Its newer date gives it no authority.
• S4, EV-DEMO-021-costs.xlsx, 19 September: fictional internal cost of €1,080. It is not a selling price and must not appear in the customer reply.
• A1, EV-DEMO-021-approval.txt, 18 September: the responsible person approves r02 for customer communication. The note explicitly leaves transport, date and availability pending. It records neither customer acceptance nor permission to send automatically.
• Q1, EV-DEMO-021-request.txt, 21 September: the customer’s fictional request quoted above. A request to confirm a condition is not evidence that it has been agreed.

The expected answer, with a separate review note

A suitable customer draft for this case is: “For EV-DEMO-021, revision r02, the equipment and setup amount is €1,800 before VAT. Transport is not priced in that amount and remains to be confirmed. The proposed date of 11 October and availability are also awaiting confirmation. We therefore cannot confirm a final price including transport or a booking yet.”

The internal review note should point to S2 for the amount and pending conditions, and A1 for the approved revision. It should identify S3 as unapproved. Keep this note separate from the customer draft; do not attach the cost sheet or copy its figures into either the customer text or its attachments.

This is the expected answer written for the exercise, not a saved AI response. The observed-result field stays “not run” until someone performs the check. In a real setup, leave cost documents outside the assistant’s access when the task does not need them; an instruction to omit them is not an access control.

When to accept the draft and when to hold it

The draft passes this exercise only if the terms, revision and source references agree. A pass does not send it or approve unresolved commercial conditions. Record who reviewed the draft and any correction before a separately authorized send.

• Base case: r02 is used, €1,800 remains the equipment-and-setup amount, and transport, date and availability stay pending. No internal cost is disclosed.
• Newer-file check: a reply using r03, €1,650 or included transport fails this case. Keep it from being sent and correct the source-selection rule.
• Missing or contradictory approval: remove A1, or add a conflicting approval note. The expected outcome is a hold with a request for the responsible person to identify the valid revision, not a guessed answer.
• Privacy and reference check: reject a draft containing €1,080, an internal-cost attachment, or a reference that does not support its claim. Keep the failed draft as sample evidence and record the correction; do not label the process proven by one passing answer.

Check permissions with the right user

For qualifying Workspace editions, Google documents access based on the user’s existing permissions. Turning off an app’s background search does not necessarily exclude a file the user opens or explicitly links. Check the settings for the account involved; a source-selection setting is not a replacement for file permissions.

For this exercise, I'd use a test account with the access intended for the person preparing quotes. I'd check its visible documents before generating text. Reviewing everything through an account that can see the whole business would give a poor picture of the team's experience.

The Workspace announcement behind the question

On 9 September 2026, Google announced cross-app Gemini features for Workspace, with availability varying by plan and some capabilities arriving later. That announcement does not establish what is enabled in your account. Check the account before choosing a tool for this exercise.

When I'd configure a tool and when I'd build

If the task is finding documents and preparing a draft for a person to review, I'd explore the existing tools first. If it needs controlled states, approvals, calculations and changes across several systems, I'd document those needs before choosing an integration or a custom build.

That is the part of the work that interests me at OpsByFabian: turning an unclear question into behaviour someone can explain and check. For a quote, starting with the valid revision and the responsible person gives us something much more concrete to discuss than a list of AI features.