Bond - The AI to-do list that does itself
by•
Bond is an AI Chief of Staff for executives. It connects to your tools, learns how your company works, and turns scattered tasks into a self-managing to-do list that always knows what you need to do next.
You can ask Bond to prepare you for your next meeting, draft a follow-up, send an email, create action items, identify blockers, surface risks, or delegate tasks to team members.
Replies
The hard part isn’t finding more tasks, it’s knowing which ones actually matter. If Bond can keep that signal clean across Slack, email, docs, and meetings, that’s a big deal.
Bond
@farrukh_butt1 Yup!! Love that you see the value in this :)
Curious how you currently decide what to-dos to prioritize? What specific problems have you run into?
@teaganyuen Mostly manual right now: urgent client work, team blockers, then follow-ups. The hard part is that priorities are spread across Slack, calls, email, and docs, so figuring out what needs attention first takes time.
How does Bond handle sensitive information like board level strategy, M&A activity or HR matters that an executive would never want surfacing in a shared or improperly scoped context?
Bond
@carlos_leonardo1 This is the exact tension we designed around.
There is one shared company brain. That's what makes Bond more than a personal assistant. But access to it is scoped per person, so you only ever see through it what you're already allowed to see. Your DMs, private channels, and personal email feed your view and only yours. A colleague's Bond can't pull them, and yours can't pull theirs.
It's enforced at the data layer, not left to the AI to decide. Just like a teammate can't open a Slack DM they're not part of, their Bond literally can't return it either. Sensitive sources get flagged private the moment they're ingested, and every insight carries a source citation so nothing ever shows up "from nowhere." So: shared brain, shared context, but strict per-person walls on what each person can actually see.
Is the bigger worry for you something sensitive of yours leaking to your team, or their private context leaking to you?
The identify blockers feature is fascinating is Bond proactively flagging blockers based on task dependencies and team activity or does it rely on the executive to manually flag something as stuck?
Bond
@carter_son Exactly, Bond proactively flags blockers based on team activity, no manual "mark as stuck" needed.
It watches the real signal across your team via emails, messages, the things people commit to and then go quiet on. So when a task is waiting on someone, a thread stalls, or a follow-up never came back, Bond surfaces it as a blocker on its own.
Ofc, you can always flag things yourself too, but the magic is exactly what you're picking up on:
Bond catches the quiet blockers you'd otherwise miss, the ones that slip precisely because nobody thought to raise them. Hopefully this got you even more excited 🙏
Chiefs of staff often serve as a trust layer between the executive and the organization how does Bond earn and maintain that trust with the broader team when they know an AI is helping drive delegation?
Bond
@chen_hao3 Great question, and trust is exactly the thing we're most deliberate about.
Our moonshot is for Bond to be genuinely proactive, but we know not everyone is ready for that leap on day one.
So trust is something we earn gradually, not assume. The idea is to start small and let confidence compound. Early on, Bond drafts the email and you approve or deny it. Once you've seen it consistently get the tone and judgment right, you can raise the trust level, and let it send on your behalf.
So the AI being in the loop isn't hidden; it's visible and earned step by step. The broader team experiences it as nothing slipping through the cracks and faster follow-through, while the executive stays in control of exactly how much autonomy Bond has at any point.
How does Bond distinguish between tasks the executive should personally handle versus tasks that should be delegated and does that threshold adapt over time based on observed behavior?
Bond
@daniel_juan2 Personally one of my favorite features, let me explain: Bond builds up a profile of you and the people you work with, learning what your responsibilities are, and what your colleagues own too. Based on that, it can suggest the right person to delegate a task to, rather than leaving everything on your plate.
And that profile sharpens over time: the more Bond observes who handles what, through your emails, messages, and what you complete or pass along, the better it gets at telling what's truly yours to do versus what's better delegated to someone else. Hope this sparks some excitement 🚀
Most executive workflows involve a lot of verbal context from calls and meetings does Bond integrate with transcription tools like Fireflies or Otter to capture and act on spoken decisions?
Bond
@new_user___10520260379921a76fc2d64 Notetakers are a gold mine for Bond. So many 'action items' from meetings get lost. But Bond captures them all.
Currently we're supporting: Granola, Clickup notetaker, Fireflies, Fellow, Fathom, Circleback. But we're adding them on the go as users ask for them :)
As an executive company scales the complexity of their operating environment grows exponentially how does Bond's architecture handle that scale without becoming a bottleneck or a noise machine itself?
Bond
@diego_joaquin1 Love this engineering question, it's the thing we obsess over.
We're basically filtering smartly through all the noise, and as a company grows, Bond does more filtering, not more pinging. There are only so many important todos you can do in a day, so our goal is to surface the ones that have the biggest impact and those that best align with your personal and company goals.
Delegation is where most chiefs of staff fail because they lack organizational trust how does Bond ensure that when it delegates a task to a team member that action carries the right level of authority and accountability?
Bond
@amna9 Very interesting question.
Bond's company brain already knows where the lines of authority and accountability actually sit: who owns what, who reports to whom, which relationships are strong and which are sensitive. So it's never delegating blind.
But the key part is you stay in full control. You decide who a task goes to, why, and how it's framed (tone of voice and all), and whether it's sent from Bond or in your own name. Nothing goes out without you steering it (unless you want to ofc). And because every item is backed by source data, the person on the receiving end sees the context too, not just a task dropped on them out of nowhere.
So the authority comes from you, Bond just makes sure it lands with the right person, the right framing, and the receipts to back it up.
Curious how you think about it: when you delegate, is the bigger risk the wrong person getting it, or just nobody actually owning the follow-through?
Bond
@mma_753 This really made my day. Thank you for the kind words Melissa!
congrats! have you seen any unexpected use cases emerge from founders using Bond in their daily workflow?
Bond
@luz_bidelspach I wish I could drop some names here but i'll lose my SOC 2 type II certification...but:
One founder used Bond purely as a 'who am I neglecting' radar. It flagged that he hadn't talked to a key investor in 6 weeks, pulled the last thread, and drafted the re-intro. That dude is now leading his current round
Somebody uses Bond to manage his contractor renovating his house. Same chaos as a startup, apparently
One guy told me he let Bond draft his replies in his tone for so long that his cofounder said he's 'nicer over slack now.' ✨mediator✨