How can a pilot separate recommendation quality from authority to contact?

A utility operations lead scopes a pilot around overdue account `ACC-6248`. The assistant can inspect the generated billing history and prepare a follow-up recommendation, but a collections reviewer holds authority to dispatch the message.

The assistant creates draft `DRF-1907` and submits it with the supporting policy reference. The case changes from awaiting preparation to awaiting reviewer decision. The reviewer returns the draft because it omits the permitted response channel. The assistant corrects it and resubmits, preserving the review history.

The consequence is a completed recommendation cycle without treating draft creation as customer contact. The pilot can evaluate whether the assistant understands its authority, incorporates review feedback and accurately reports the current state.

A buyer can ask for this authority boundary in the sample brief, tool permissions and acceptance criteria. If later scope includes dispatch, that introduces a different responsibility and should be evaluated explicitly. The scenario teaches a practical starting principle: decide which business powers the assistant receives before interpreting successful task completion as evidence of readiness for a wider role.