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.
Risk identification is a bold capability to claim is Bond surfacing risks based on pattern recognition across your own company's data or is it applying more generalized heuristics?
Bond
@andrew_paul11 It's grounded in your data, not generic playbook heuristics, and that's the whole point.
Bond isn't going "70% of startups die from runway, beware." It learns your company's normal rhythm and flags when something breaks from your baseline: a thread gone quiet, a deal that hasn't moved in 12 days when it usually moves every 3, a commitment a teammate made three weeks ago that quietly died. The light layer of general heuristics just helps it know what tends to matter. The actual risks are 100% your reality, and every flag comes with sources, so it's never "Bond has a bad feeling," it's "here's the exact thread and why it looks off."
Does that make sense?
When Bond drafts a follow up email on behalf of an executive how does it learn and preserve the individual's tone communication style and relationship nuances with specific stakeholders?
Bond
@antonio_manuel1 A generic "AI-sounding" draft is worse than no draft, so this is something we obsess over.
Two layers:
your voice, learned from how you actually write (phrasing, formality, length), not a slider you configure.
The relationship, because you write to a co-founder differently than an investor, and Bond picks up that history instead of flattening everyone into one template.
What's on the roadmap? Curious where you're taking the "chief of staff" concept. Are you going deeper on specific workflows or broader across more of the exec stack?
Bond
@annemarie_leys Love this question.
The blunt version: we won't stop until every executive is unemployed from their own to-do list.
The thing we're building toward is you waking up to a single message from Bond that says: "you picked up 10 new todos since you left yesterday. I already handled 6 of them myself and delegated the other 4 to your team. You're all good." That's the whole dream. Not a dashboard you check, but a chief of staff that just runs the back office of your life while you sleep.
And we're honestly very, very close to that. More than people expect.
So to your actual question: it's both, but the order matters. We go deeper on the core workflows first (discovery, prioritization, delegation, follow-through) because that's where trust is won or lost, and then broader across the whole stack once the foundation is rock solid. Depth earns the right to go wide :)
Really cool idea. How does the AI handle task prioritization under the hood? Can I feed it my quarterly marketing OKRs so it knows which tasks actually move the needle versus what's just urgent?
Bond
@andika_fadhilah Under the hood Bond scores everything on things like importance, urgency, and effort, then ranks from there. Urgency also decays and climbs over time, so something genuinely time-sensitive rises while a loud-but-pointless ping doesn't hijack your day.
It also classifies your todos across multiple frameworks (Eisenhower, GTD, and more), because everyone manages their work differently. Some people think in quadrants, some in next-actions, so Bond meets you in whatever system you already live in instead of forcing its own.
And yes, exactly what you're describing: you can feed Bond your priorities and goals (quarterly OKRs included), and it weighs tasks against what actually moves the needle for you, not just what's screaming loudest. That's the difference between a to-do list and a chief of staff. One sorts by deadline, the other sorts by impact.
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 🚀