Bond - The AI to-do list that does itself

@xie_yujin Haha hear me out: there's an inverse correlation between someone's seniority and their screen size. Juniors run three ultrawides like a NASA control room, while actual execs are making million-dollar calls from their phone in the back of an Uber.

So yes, mobile matters a lot. We focused on desktop first to get the core right, but there's already a fully functional mobile PWA today. Making that buttery smooth is next on my personal priority list, because that's where most of our users actually live.

@xie_yujin Yes, so currently Bond is a progressive web app, you can add it to your home screen and it runs like a native app (full-screen, app icon, shortcuts to Chat / Todos / Replies).
On the go you can also use BondBot in Slack on your phone, plus push notifications for briefings and routines. But don't worry a truly native app is on the roadmap, and we already have some great UX ideas 🔥.

@elaine_hladik Thank you! Coming from a former CoS, that means a lot! BOND takes the grunt layer (tracking action items, chasing follow-ups, context gathering across tools, executing on the routine busy work) so the human gets that time back for the high-impact calls!

@german_merlo1 Appreciate the support Germán!

@german_merlo1 appreciate the comment. Every high performer deals with the daily anxiety of not wanting to be the bottleneck, scared of forgetting something. Now they have Bond that remembers everything so they don't have to.

@michal_giernatowski Bond surfaces things based on timing, context, and relationships. E.g. A calendar event coming up triggers prep; a message from a key contact flags for a reply, and drafting kicks in when the action is clear but needs your voice (a reply, a follow-up). Autonomous actions are reserved for low-risk, high-confidence tasks where intent is clear. Anything touching the outside world (like sending an email) goes through an approval step first. The exec stays in control; Bond just removes the friction.

@michal_giernatowski Great question, because getting this dial wrong in either direction kills trust fast.

The way I think about it is a spectrum based on stakes and confidence:

• Surface when it's something you need to know but only you can judge: a risk, a decision waiting on you, a thread heating up. Bond brings it to you, doesn't touch it.

• Draft when there's a clear action but it needs your voice or judgment: a follow-up email, a nudge to a teammate, a reply. Bond prepares it and hands it over for a yes/tweak/no.

• Act for the safe, reversible, low-stakes stuff: organizing, cross-referencing, marking things done when it sees real completion signals, prepping context. The plumbing, basically.

@marie_bontinck Honestly, the thing that surprised early users most was that BOND tracks commitments they made, even when they were buried in messy notes, transcripts, or events.
It helps executives avoid dropping any balls. 🎾

People expected help with email and calendar triage, but the “oh, wow” moment was BOND resurfacing a specific piece of work they had forgotten was still on their plate, with the source quote or context to back it up.

@sanreds Thank you, sanreds ! Great questions.

1. We don't see Bond as replacing one specific tool. It sits above the tools you already use and helps turn all that scattered context into a self-managing todo layer. So less "another app to maintain," more "an orchestration layer across the stack."

2. The ROI is mostly time and follow-through: fewer missed follow-ups, less context reconstruction, faster delegation, and less chief-of-staff/EA busywork. For execs, even saving a few hours a week can justify the cost, but the bigger value is often avoiding the one thing that would have slipped through the cracks and ofc staying focused on the right company goals is gold.

3. Today we're most focused on founders, executives, chiefs of staff, and lean leadership teams where the coordination load is already painful. That tends to be scaling startups and SMBs more than huge enterprises right now, though the product naturally becomes more valuable as the org gets more complex.

Hope this helps 😊

@millwiller Great question! It's actually both. Bond uses a combination of rule-based signals (recency, source, sender relationship) and strategic context, like your stated goals, priorities, and responsibilities, to determine urgency. So a cold email from a stranger and a message from a key customer about a blocker will score very differently, even if they arrived at the same time. The due dates reflect that combined signal.

@chloesamaha  @millwiller It's much closer to the second one, and that contrast is exactly the right way to frame it.

The rigid version ("all emails get a 48h due date") is what makes most tools useless, because it treats a note from your biggest customer the same as a newsletter. Bond doesn't do flat rules like that. It scores each item on things like importance, urgency, and effort, and weighs that against who it's from, what it blocks, and your actual goals and priorities. So a task that moves the needle on a key objective outranks something that's merely due soon.

Urgency does evolve with time, so genuinely time-sensitive things climb as deadlines approach, but time-pressure is one input, not the whole formula. The goal is to sort by impact, not just by clock. A truly time-bound thing rises, but it never lets "soon" masquerade as "important."

Does that make sense?

@adit_patil1 Thanks for the kind words, be warned even more features are coming to ruin your excuses further! 😅

@kush_bhuwalka you should try it!

@can_erden Thanks Can! 🙌
Yes, Bond can connect to custom workflows via MCP today! and API based integrations are on our roadmap.

For your co-founder setup, absolutely. Each person can have their own tools, workflows, and context tailored to their role while operating within the same organization. So don't hesitate to try it out 😇