if Copilot gives useless answers about your internal processes, it's probably not Copilot's fault

A pattern we keep seeing: a team connects Copilot or ChatGPT to their file storage, expects employees to get self-service answers about internal processes, and gets vague garbage back. First assumption is the AI is bad. Usually the process was just never documented, it lives in one person's head, or in an SOP that stopped being accurate two system migrations ago.

The distinction that makes this click: a policy tells you which expenses are reimbursable. Process knowledge tells you where to submit it, who approves it, and what happens when the expense falls outside the standard policy. Connectors give AI the first kind. The second kind somebody has to create first.

What to capture for each process:

• the steps and the order they happen in
• the tools and systems used along the way
• decision points where what happens next depends on a condition
• alternate paths
• rules and exceptions
• context, enough to understand why, not just what

One thing worth repeating: document while someone is actually doing the work, not afterwards from memory. Reconstruction loses the workarounds, and the workarounds are usually the part people ask about.

Where Tango fits: you click through the workflow and it becomes a step-by-step guide with screenshots and descriptions. Workflow Branching handles the "if X, then this path instead" cases. And the workflows carry structured metadata (XPaths, CSS selectors, step-level annotations) so they can be exported as agent instructions or Skill files instead of rebuilt from scratch for the agent. Same guides also run as in-app Guidance and Pins for the humans.

Has anyone here exported a workflow as agent instructions yet among members of this sub? Curious what you pointed it at and whether the branching survived the handoff.