Launching today
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.
This looks really interesting! How does Bond prioritize tasks and action items when it receives information from multiple tools and conversations? What makes its decision-making different from a traditional AI assistant?
Bond
Love this question. Short version: Bond doesn't prioritize at the moment a message arrives — it's done the work beforehand. It pre-links every person (all their accounts = one human), every meeting (with its history and notes), and who's responsible for what. New info lands on that context, then gets two judgments: is this actually a commitment for YOU, and how much does it matter vs. everything else on your plate? A promise to an investor on Tuesday's call ≠ a "we should look into this" in a group thread. Traditional ai assistants reason from scratch every time you ask; Bond understands once, ahead of time, and judges with full context. EA-who's-been-with-you-a-year energy, not smart-intern-guessing 🙏
Awesome launch!
Quick question: Can Bond connect to our custom workflows via API or MCP? We’re two co-founders with different roles, so would it be possible to have separate setups or workflows for each of us?
Bond
@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 😇
Bond
@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.
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?
Bond
@cedric_anckaert Hi Cédric
Great question! This is exactly why companies are distrustful of tools like OpenClaw and others.
Out of the box, Bond respects the access levels in each application you connect, so sensitive information that is for your eyes only will stay for your eyes only and never accidentally leak into our multi-player company context.
We also have ZDR agreements in place with our AI providers, never train any models on your data and never sell any of your data because we know how sensitive the information executives have access to can be.
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?
Executives often operate with high context unwritten rules about how decisions get made how long does Bond's learning phase take before it genuinely understands a company's operating rhythm?
Bond
@ana_popescu2 TL;DR: Bond is useful on day one, but deeply dialed in over a couple of weeks.
Within minutes of connecting your tools, Bond has a working model of your company: who's who, which projects are live, who talks to whom, what's moving. That alone is enough to start surfacing real signal.
The unwritten-rules layer (how decisions actually get made, what you quietly care about, who gets looped in on what) sharpens over the first couple of days. It learns two ways: you can tell it directly (your role, your priorities, your rules), and it infers the rest from watching real activity. The explicit stuff lands instantly, the implicit stuff compounds.
And it never really "finishes" learning, which is the point. Companies change constantly, so a static model would go stale anyway. The brain just keeps adapting.
I'm very curious: would you mind sharing some unwritten rules that apply to your company? Would love to learn from them so I can proactively make Bond learn those.