Home / Platforms / Tools & Integrations
Agent Platform

Tools are where an agent stops talking and starts working.

This page covers the connective tissue: four tiers of plugins, the built-in tool catalogue, parameter-driven custom plugins, MCP in both directions, the adoption of agents you did not build, and the published surfaces your users and systems actually call.

Four tiers

First, second, third, custom

Each tier has a different cost structure, and choosing the wrong one is how tool bills get out of control

Bidirectional

MCP, both ways

Call external MCP servers, and publish your own workflows as MCP servers for others to consume

No rewrite

Adopt what exists

Third-party and in-house agents register into one entry point instead of being rebuilt

Config first

APIs without code

An existing API becomes a plugin through parameters, tested online before it is bound

Plugin architecture

Four plugin tiers, four different commercial relationships

The tier determines who invoices you, who holds the credential, and who is accountable when the call fails at three in the morning. Deciding this per plugin, deliberately, is part of the architecture — not a procurement detail.

Provided by the platform, deployable on your infrastructure

These ship with the platform and can be deployed alongside it, locally. They are usable straight out of the deployment with no additional charge and no external account to open.

  • Best for — capabilities that must work in a private or air-gapped estate, and tools where adding a third-party dependency is politically or contractually impossible.
  • What you do — enable the tool in deployment settings and, where it touches internal data, give it the same access path you would give a service account.
  • Ownership — the platform team maintains the tool; your team owns the configuration, the credentials and the monitoring.

Cost structure

No separate line item. The cost is inside your platform commitment and, where relevant, your own infrastructure footprint.

Deployable on-premise No external account No usage billing

Watch for: if a capability in this tier later needs a hosted dependency, it stops being deployable locally. Ask before you architect on top of it.

Cloud services the platform integrates officially

These are commercial cloud services with a first-class integration. To use one you open an account with that provider, apply for access keys, and the platform calls it on your behalf.

  • Best for — capabilities that only make sense as a hosted service, where buying a second relationship would be wasteful.
  • What you do — register the account, hold and rotate the access key pair (AK/SK) in your own secret store, and agree the billing relationship directly with that provider.
  • Ownership — the provider owns the service and its SLA; you own the key, the spend and the data that crosses the boundary.

Cost structure

Billed by the cloud service, on that provider's own metering. It does not appear on your platform invoice, which means it will not be governed by your platform cost controls unless you wire it that way.

Account required AK/SK held by you Provider metering

Watch for: credentials live in your estate, so rotation and revocation need a named owner.

Third-party cloud services with no direct relationship

Also integrated by the platform, but you register and pay with the third party yourself. There is no commercial relationship between you and the platform for these.

  • Best for — specialist services where you already have a vendor, or where an existing contract gives you better terms than the platform could.
  • What you do — register on the vendor's own platform, apply for the credentials there, and accept the vendor's data handling terms in your own name.
  • Ownership — entirely yours, including the security review. The platform provides the connector, not the assurance.

Cost structure

Billed by the third party on their terms, at your negotiated rate. This is often the cheapest route for a company with an existing enterprise agreement.

Your vendor contract Your security review Your price

Watch for: connector behaviour can lag the vendor's own API changes. Pin expectations in a regression test, not in a promise.

Your existing API, packaged as a plugin without writing call code

A custom plugin turns an endpoint you already operate into something an agent can call. It is configuration — name, description, address, method, headers, parameter rules and output mapping — not a development project. For a business analyst with API documentation, this is an afternoon's work rather than a sprint.

  • Best for — internal services, legacy endpoints, ERP and CRM APIs, and anything a vendor will not put behind a connector.
  • What you do — describe the request and the response, press Test until the mapping is right, then bind the plugin to an agent.
  • Ownership — you own the endpoint, its availability, its rate limits and its data classification.

Cost structure

No licence cost for the plugin itself. The cost is engineering time in your own team to make the endpoint stable enough for an agent to depend on.

Configuration only No call code You own the endpoint

Integration in numbers

0
Plugin tiers

Four different commercial relationships, not one bundle

0
Directions for MCP

Your tools exposed to agents, and agents exposed as tools

0
Things to rebuild

The endpoint you already run becomes a tool without being rewritten

0
Identity model

Callers prove who they are, per request

Four plugin tiers, four different commercial relationships

Conflating these tiers is how organisations end up paying for something they assumed was included, or building something they were entitled to.

Included

Tier 1 — Foundation tools

What every agent needs before anyone writes a plugin: web access, file handling, calculation, code execution in a sandbox, and structured output. Included in the platform because an agent without these is a toy.

Build once

Tier 2 — Your internal systems

ERP, CRM, ITSM, document management, identity. Built once, used by every agent that needs them. This is where most of the integration value actually lives.

Commercial

Tier 3 — Partner and third-party

Partner APIs and paid third-party services, governed by their own commercial terms. We do not resell these — we connect them and manage the contract relationship transparently.

Ecosystem

Tier 4 — Marketplace plugins

Published by others, installable by you, with the same evaluation and governance treatment as anything you built. A plugin is not trusted because it is in the marketplace.

Built-in capabilities

The tools every agent needs before anyone writes a plugin

These are the capabilities that arrive with the platform and quietly remove the need for a custom build in a surprising number of agents.

Web browsing and content reading

A browser capability that retrieves network content for a given address, covering web pages, files and link reading, plus a link reader that extracts the main body text from a raw URL rather than the surrounding markup.

Query and extraction

A SQL capability that queries data with statements, and an OCR capability that recognises and extracts text from images — the difference between an agent that can read a screenshot and one that cannot.

Context and time

A time tool for the current date and time, an external knowledge base connector for systems that already hold your content, and academic retrieval across arXiv and Semantic Scholar for research-heavy agents.

Beyond the built-ins: an extensible catalogue

The plugin centre organises its catalogue into ten categories, which is a reasonable proxy for what enterprises actually ask for: logistics, news reading, science and education, life assistance, voice and video, image processing, text processing, tool efficiency, and web search, alongside general entertainment categories that rarely see enterprise use.

We deliberately do not quote a plugin count on this page. Catalogue figures differ between product versions, and a number that changes with the release cycle tells an architect nothing. What matters is whether the specific capability your workflow depends on is present, or can be reached as a custom plugin against the same API.

The escape hatches that are always available

1

HTTP request node

Call any REST API directly, for the cases a plugin does not cover.

2

Code block node

Python or JavaScript for custom logic, when a configuration is not enough.

3

Database module

Create, read, update and delete against a database — for persistent agent memory and business data interaction.

4

File parsing

Structured reading of documents as a tool, not only as knowledge-base material.

Custom plugins

Turning an endpoint you already run into a tool an agent can use

The configuration surface is deliberately explicit. Nothing is hidden, because the point is that a person who understands the business domain — not only the code — can make their own system callable by an agent.

What you configure

  • Plugin name and description — the description is what the agent reads when choosing a tool, so vague wording here produces vague tool selection later.
  • API address and request method — the endpoint and the HTTP method, GET or POST and the rest.
  • Request headers — including the header that carries the credential.
  • Request parameter rules — each parameter's name, type, whether it is required, and a description of what it means.
  • Output field mapping — a JSONPath expression per field, so the agent receives named values rather than an opaque response body.

Test online, then bind

Configuration comes with a Test action that issues the call and shows the mapped result against your own parameters. The intent is unglamorous and important: get the call and the mapping working before the plugin is attached to an agent, so that a failure during a live conversation is a business problem and not a configuration problem.

Authentication the plugin supports

Authentication is carried in a custom request header, which means the same mechanism accommodates every common enterprise pattern:

A

Bearer token

A short-lived token issued by your identity provider and passed as an Authorization header.

B

AK/SK

Access key and secret key for services that expect signed requests.

C

OAuth

Bearer credentials obtained from an OAuth flow you already operate.

D

Internal signing

Your own corporate signature scheme, for internal services that verify on your terms rather than the vendor's.

Our recommendation. Use short-lived tokens wherever the target system supports them, and keep the secret out of the configuration. A static key pasted into a plugin header is a credential with no expiry, no rotation and no audit trail.

MCP works in both directions, and the second one is where the leverage is

The first direction gets you started fast. The second is what turns an agent into a component other systems can depend on.

Exposing your tools to agents
  • You already run the endpoint — it is exposed, not rebuilt
  • The agent's identity and caller's identity are both carried
  • Your existing authorisation rules apply unchanged
  • The contract is documented and versioned like any API
  • Rate limits and quotas are yours to set and enforced
  • No new surface area to secure beyond what you already run
Exposing agents as tools
  • Other systems can call your agent as if it were an endpoint
  • Useful when a workflow in another system needs an agent's judgement
  • Requires the same identity discipline in reverse
  • Adds a latency dependency you must design around
  • Cost per call becomes visible at the call site
  • Rarely needed on a first project — build it when something demands it
MCP and interoperability

MCP works in both directions, and that is the part that matters

Most agent platforms can call an external MCP server. Fewer can publish their own capabilities back out. The second direction is what turns a set of internal workflows into a shared capability that other teams' agents — and other vendors' agents — can consume without a bespoke integration.

Inbound

The platform as MCP client

Your agents call external MCP servers as ordinary tools. Anything exposed by a server — internal services, a vendor's specialist capability, another team's agent — becomes callable inside your orchestration, with the same parameter discipline as a first-party plugin.

  • One integration, many agents — a capability is registered once and inherited by every agent that needs it.
  • Unified tool surface — external servers and native plugins appear to the agent through the same tool interface, so prompts do not fork.
  • Gateway value — an MCP gateway in front of your estate is where you enforce access control, redact data and log calls, once, for everything behind it.
Outbound

Your workflows, published as an MCP server

A workflow or agent you have already built and governed can be published as an MCP server, so that other agents consume it as a tool. The business logic, the retrieval, the approval rules and the audit trail stay exactly where they were — and the capability becomes reusable.

  • Capability reuse — one well-built expense-claim workflow serves finance's own agent and the HR assistant that needs it.
  • Cross-team sharing — a capability can be published across departmental boundaries without granting users direct access to the underlying systems.
  • Shortest path to reuse — publishing an MCP server is far less work than a bespoke integration, and the consuming side needs no knowledge of your internals.

Why this is the shortest path. Capability reuse is normally solved by duplicating logic, by building a shared service, or by integrating one team at a time — each of which takes a programme. Publishing an MCP server is a configuration act that turns an asset you already own into a published interface. For enterprises with many internal teams and duplicated automation, that is usually the highest-leverage move available in the whole platform.

A2A and enterprise systems

Do not rebuild what already works

Two questions come up in almost every first architecture review: what do we do with the agents we already bought, and how do we reach the systems that have no API? Both have an answer that avoids a rewrite.

Adopting external and in-house agents

Agents built on another platform — or built by your own team on a different stack — can be registered into a single unified entry point and scheduled alongside the agents you own. Support for the A2A protocol, and for SSE-based conversational agents, means the integration point is the agent protocol rather than a bespoke connector written for one vendor.

For an enterprise that has already invested in AI assets, this is the difference between consolidating and starting over. We will always recommend consolidation, because the accumulated behaviour, prompt logic and evaluation history inside an existing agent is far more expensive to recreate than to register — and far more likely to be subtly wrong if you do.

A2A protocol SSE conversational agents Unified entry point

Reaching your systems of record

OA, CRM, ERP, ticketing, travel, calendar and to-do systems are integrated through APIs, the Web SDK, or MCP servers — the same three routes used elsewhere on the platform, so there is one integration discipline to learn rather than three.

1

Notification push

Push results into your enterprise collaboration platform so that an agent's action reaches the person who has to act, without them watching a console.

2

Approval hand-off

Where a workflow needs a human decision, the approval can be raised in the OA system and the agent resumes when the answer arrives.

3

Shared knowledge source

Channels can be bound to a common knowledge source with per-channel parameters for first-token latency, message timeout ceilings and long-content segmentation, so answers do not contradict across surfaces.

Bring us your integration list, not your requirements document

Seven answers we need for each system. If you can answer them, we can usually give you a date. If you cannot answer 6 and 7, that is the real conversation.

  • System name and what it is the system of record for.
  • Does it have a real API, and does it have one you are permitted to use?
  • What authentication does it use, and who owns those credentials?
  • What is the read path, and what is the write path? Are they the same team?
  • What does its audit log already capture?
  • How many concurrent callers can it take before it degrades?
  • Who signs off when the agent writes to it?
Publishing and access

Where the agent runs, and how callers prove who they are

Publishing is a set of surfaces rather than a single one. Authentication has to hold across all of them, because the same agent will be reached from a channel, an embedded widget and a back-end service.

SurfaceHow it is usedTypical fit
IM channel, one-click publishPublish the agent to enterprise messaging and personal messaging channels, including official accounts and mini-programmes, with the channel's own identity in front of the user.Internal assistants and employee-facing services
Web SDK embeddingA JavaScript bundle embedded in a site, app or H5 page, initialised with an application identifier, a channel and a user identifier.Customer-facing chat on your own property
REST APIBack-end invocation by your own services, with SSE streaming so the caller can render tokens as they arrive rather than waiting for the full answer.Server-to-server workflows and embedded features
Web SDK / H5 terminalA terminal form factor built for tablets and fixed devices on a production line.Industrial and frontline deployments
MCP server publicationThe agent or workflow is exposed as an MCP server for other agents to call as a tool.Capability sharing across teams and platforms
A2A accessThe agent is addressed through the agent-to-agent protocol for coordinated scheduling with other agents.Multi-agent estates and cross-vendor collaboration
Private client distributionA client deployed inside your own network for environments where external distribution is not acceptable.Regulated and internal-only estates

Keys and tokens

A published application yields an API key, and callers authenticate with a bearer token in the Authorization header.

Your identity system, connected

SSO and OAuth integration against the enterprise directory, so the agent receives the caller's department, position and line manager without anyone writing authentication logic.

Webhooks and network controls

Inbound callbacks are signature-verified in a request header, and IP allowlists can be applied to internal interfaces and to the outbound addresses your channels use.

One user, one identity, everywhere. A single user identifier follows the same person across channels, so the employee who asked something in a messaging client, in an embedded widget and in a back-end service has one history and one set of permissions. Multi-account and multi-device users get consistent behaviour rather than contradictory answers.

Where the agent runs, and how callers prove who they are

Dropping the caller's identity at the integration boundary is the most common serious defect we find in enterprise agent estates. It is invisible until an incident.

01

Agent identity

Who the agent is, which service account it acts as, and what that account is permitted.

1
02

Caller identity

Who asked the agent to act. Carried through, never dropped at the integration boundary.

2
03

Delegation record

The pair, logged together. This is what an auditor asks for: not what the agent did, but who caused it.

3
04

Authorisation decision

Evaluated at the tool, against the pair — not against the agent alone.

4
05

Audit entry

Recorded with the pair, the arguments, the result, and the authorisation decision.

5
Boundaries

What we will not claim

Two things on this page are deliberately described without a product surface, because pretending otherwise would only move the problem into your architecture review.

Per-channel rate limiting is yours to build. There is no clear productised interface for configuring rate limits and quotas at the level of a published channel. We do not pretend otherwise in a proposal. In practice this means a gateway of your own in front of the published endpoints, sized to your traffic profile, with the platform acting as the agent runtime behind it.

Custom plugins need structured responses. The API behind a custom plugin is expected to return a structured payload that the configured JSONPath expressions can read. Responses that are irregular, deeply nested in a bespoke format, or partly non-structured need a conversion layer in front of the endpoint before the plugin can be relied on. We will tell you this during design rather than at integration.

Also worth saying plainly

  • Catalogue size is not a design argument. We would rather specify the handful of tools your workflow needs, and know exactly what each one costs, than quote a number that changes with the release cycle.
  • Tool quality depends on the target. A connector is only as good as the service behind it. We will not present a third-party integration as equivalent to a first-party one.
  • MCP does not remove the integration work. It removes bespoke connector code, not the need to agree ownership, data classification and failure behaviour with whoever owns the target system.
  • Per-channel and per-user quotas should be designed with finance in mind. We can help you model the traffic; we will not invent a default limit on your behalf.

What we will not claim

We do not claim any integration is instant. Systems with real APIs and real contracts take real time. We do not claim we can connect to something that has no programmatic interface without building one, and we will not pretend a screen-scraping wrapper is the same thing.

Five questions that settle whether you need this

Five yes-or-no answers. If you cannot answer the first three, the capability is not your bottleneck yet.

  • Can you name the specific workflow this serves — not the department?
  • Can you name the person accountable when it is wrong?
  • Can you show me historical cases where a human did this task, so we can build an evaluation set?
  • Can you tell me what this capability explicitly will not do?
  • Can you tell me what it costs per task, and how you would reduce that cost?

What the first ninety days look like

The same shape on every capability. The content differs; the checkpoints do not.

If a proposal cannot show you these checkpoints, it is describing a pilot rather than an operating capability.
By day 30By day 60By day 90
Baseline captured on your metricWorkflow running with a named approverMetric moved, against the baseline you did not choose
Scope boundary documented — including what it may not doEvaluation harness re-running on every changeDecision log reviewed by your risk function
Historical cases assembled for testingTraining delivered, completion in the LMSNext workflow scoped from what we learned
Data lineage for every source the agent readsCost per task measured and modelledEvidence pack complete and accepted
Topics we cover

What this page answers

Every topic below is covered in the sections above, and each links to the page that goes deeper on it.

MCP tool ecosystem enterpriseenterprise plugin architectureA2A agent protocolERP CRM integration AI agentAPI gateway for agentsAI agent platformenterprise AI agent platformAI agent platform evaluation criteriaAI agent runtimeagent orchestration platformmulti-agent orchestration patternsmulti-agent system architectureAI agent architecture comparisonReAct vs ReWoo vs plan-and-executewhat is ReAct agentplan-and-execute agent designdeep research agentAI agent development platformAI agent DevOpsagentic workflow design patternsAI workflow automation enterpriseAI agent tool callingMCP vs API integrationModel Context Protocol enterpriseMCP server enterprise deploymentA2A protocol enterprise AIagent-to-agent interoperabilityAI agent memory architecturecontext window management for agentsLLM as judge evaluationLLM as judge best practicesAI agent evaluation frameworkAI agent testing frameworkregression testing for AI agentsAI agent observability tracingLLM tracing and debuggingLLM token cost controlAI agent cost optimisationAI cost governance financehallucination reduction enterprisehallucination detection LLMprompt injection defence enterpriseAI firewall enterprisehuman in the loop AI designhuman in the loop vs fully autonomous AIAI agent sandboxingprivate deployment AI agentshybrid AI deployment enterprisemulti-model routing enterprisemodel gateway enterpriseAI agent observability best practicesbad case analysis LLMAI data flywheelAI agent performance monitoringAI agent SLA designenterprise agent identity and accessagent RBAC designwhat is AI agent platformhow to implement AI agent platformhow to choose a AI agent platform providerhow to evaluate AI agent platform vendorshow to build an AI agent platform roadmapAI agent platform best practicesAI agent platform implementation guideAI agent platform for mid-market companiesAI agent platform cost and pricingAI agent platform ROI and business caseAI agent platform governance and controlsAI agent platform implementation roadmapAI agent platform vs traditional approachesAI agent platform vs manual processbenefits of AI agent platform for bankingchallenges of AI agent platform for bankingAI agent platform readiness checklistAI agent platform maturity modelAI agent platform KPI frameworkAI agent platform team and skills neededAI agent platform integration with existing systemsAI agent platform pilot to productionwho needs AI agent platformwhen to adopt AI agent platformAI agent platform for bankingAI agent platform for banking companieshow to use AI agent platform in bankingAI agent platform for financial servicesAI agent platform for financial services companieshow to use AI agent platform in financial servicesAI agent platform for manufacturingAI agent platform for manufacturing companieshow to use AI agent platform in manufacturingAI agent platform for healthcareAI agent platform for healthcare companieshow to use AI agent platform in healthcareAI agent platform for telecomsAI agent platform for telecoms companieshow to use AI agent platform in telecomsAI agent platform for logisticsAI agent platform for logistics companieshow to use AI agent platform in logisticsAI agent platform for insuranceAI agent platform for insurance companieshow to use AI agent platform in insuranceAI agent platform for public sectorAI agent platform for public sector companieshow to use AI agent platform in public sectorAI agent platform for retailAI agent platform for retail companieshow to use AI agent platform in retailAI agent platform for energyAI agent platform for energy companieshow to use AI agent platform in energyAI agent platform for professional servicesAI agent platform for professional services companieshow to use AI agent platform in professional servicesAI agent platform for propertyAI agent platform for property companieshow to use AI agent platform in propertyAI agent platform for transportAI agent platform for transport companieshow to use AI agent platform in transport
Next step

Bring us your integration list, not your requirements document.

A working session on the systems you already run: which need a custom plugin, which should be an MCP server, and which are worth leaving behind. You will leave with a tiering decision per system and an honest view of the work.