Autonomy scopes
An autonomy rule can be attached at four levels: one contact, one endpoint (a single mailbox or a single phone number), a whole channel, or the whole workspace. When more than one applies, the narrowest wins outright — it is not blended, averaged or intersected with the wider rules. That is what lets one strict exception survive a workspace-wide loosening.
The four levels#
| Scope | What it attaches to | Typical use |
|---|---|---|
contact | One person or organisation you correspond with | An account where every word is read by a lawyer, or a customer who has asked for a named human |
endpoint | One mailbox, or one phone number | A billing@ mailbox held tighter than hello@; a number published on an invoice |
channel | Email, WhatsApp, SMS or voice, across the workspace | The ordinary place to set policy |
workspace | Everything, as the fallback | The default posture a new mailbox or number inherits |
Endpoint is the level people forget exists. It is not a synonym for channel. Email is a channel; accounts@example.net is an endpoint. Voice is a channel; the number printed on your invoices is an endpoint. A workspace with four mailboxes has four endpoints on the email channel, and each of them can carry a different mode while the channel channel setting covers the rest.
How the effective mode is resolved#
Connect has an action to take: a reply to write, a call to place.
Result It knows the contact, the endpoint the work belongs to, and the channel.
It looks for a setting on that contact.
Result If one exists, that is the answer and nothing wider is consulted.
Failing that, the endpoint's own setting.
Result One mailbox or one number can therefore be stricter or looser than its channel.
Failing that, the channel's; failing that, the workspace's.
Result The workspace level is the fallback, so every action has a defined mode even where nobody set one.
Why it is built this way#
The alternative — a single rule per workspace — forces a false choice. A business that is happy for Connect to answer routine email on its own usually still wants a person on the one account that is being renewed this month. With one setting, that business either slows everything down or accepts risk on the account it cares about most.
Memory uses the same hierarchy, in the same order: workspace, channel, endpoint, contact. That is deliberate, so that the answer to "what applies to this piece of work" has one shape whether you are asking about permission or about knowledge. The memory viewer even returns an empty tier rather than omitting it, so "nothing is set at this level" is a visible answer instead of an absence you have to infer — a habit worth borrowing when you read the autonomy screen.
Reading what is actually in force#
Two questions are worth separating when something behaves unexpectedly. *Which rule applied?* is answered by the decision log, which names it against each action and each refusal. *Which would apply next time?* is answered on the autonomy screen, by walking the four levels for that contact and endpoint.
- A setting appears to be ignored
- A narrower one exists. Check the contact first, then the endpoint. An exception left on a contact months ago outlives every channel change made since.
- A setting was removed and nothing changed
- You removed a wider one while a narrower one was still in force. Removing the workspace default does not clear a contact exception.
- Two mailboxes behave differently
- That is endpoint scope doing its job. It is a configuration, not a fault, and the autonomy screen shows which mailboxes carry their own setting.
- A contact keeps its exception after a merge
- Merging duplicate people keeps the surviving record's settings. Re-check the exceptions after a merge rather than assuming they carried across.
Questions#
What exactly is an endpoint?
One mailbox or one phone number — a single address Connect works through, rather than the class of addresses a channel covers. sales@example.net and support@example.net are two endpoints on the same channel and can hold different modes.
If a contact writes to two different mailboxes, which rule wins?
The contact's, because it is narrower than the endpoint. A setting attached to a person follows that person across every mailbox and every channel where they appear, which is usually what you meant when you set it.
Can I see every exception in one place?
The autonomy screen lists what a workspace has set, level by level. That is the list to review before loosening a channel, because the narrower entries survive the change and keep behaving as they did.