Human-centered design systems and product experiences
Core services
01UI/UX Design02Web Development03Software Development042D/3D Experiences05App Development06AI Agents & Automation07Website DesignTechnical services
Frontend Engineering
React DevelopmentNext.js DevelopmentWeb ApplicationsEnterprise DashboardsSaaS PlatformsBackend & Infrastructure
API DevelopmentCloud InfrastructureDevOps & CI/CDBackend SystemsCustom SoftwareIndustries we serve
Technology & Software
AI Security Alert Triage Agent Development
Real alerts first, noise explained
An agent for the alert queue of a security team.
An agent for the alert queue of a security team. It enriches each alert with the context an analyst would look up, groups related signals into one case, and prepares the response steps from your playbook for an analyst to approve. It takes no action on its own.
A security team drowns in alerts, most of them harmless. An analyst opens each one, looks up the user, the device, the address, and closes it. The fortieth is closed as quickly as the first, and that is the one that mattered. The work that needs an expert is deciding what to do. The work that fills the day is collecting what the expert needs to decide.
This page describes a workflow we propose to build as a custom project. It does not exist as software yet. It would reuse the approval routing from our IT helpdesk demonstration, where sensitive requests are opened for approval and never carried out, and the handling of text that tries to instruct the agent. Connections to security tools, enrichment and case grouping are not built.
How the Work Is Done Today
Too many alerts
Analysts close hundreds a day, most without consequence.
The same lookups, by hand
User, device, location and history are checked one by one.
Related signals seen separately
Five alerts are one incident and are handled as five.
Fatigue
The real alert looks like the forty false ones before it.
Automation with too much power
A tool disables an executive's account on a false positive.
No record of why
An alert was closed, and nobody wrote down the reasoning.
From the First Signal to the Record
An example of one case, in 6 steps. The same steps play in the picture at the top of this page.
Alerts arrive
Three alerts arrive within ten minutes about one user account.
Context added
The user is in finance, the sign-in came from a new country, and their laptop is patched.
Signals grouped
The three alerts are joined into one case with a timeline.
Severity set
Your rules rate a finance account with an unusual sign-in as high.
Response prepared
The playbook's steps are prepared, naming the account and the session to revoke.
Analyst decides
The analyst confirms with the user's manager, approves two steps and records why.
Six jobs it carries through
01Alert enrichment
Adds the context an analyst needs.
- The user, their role and recent activity
- The device and its patch state
- The address and its reputation from your sources
- Similar past alerts and their outcomes
02Grouping
Joins related signals into one case.
- Same user, device or address
- Within a time window you set
- A timeline of what happened
- Alerts that do not belong left separate
03Severity by your rules
Applies your criteria for urgency.
- Your severity definitions
- Asset and user criticality
- Known benign patterns you listed
- The rule behind each rating
04Response preparation
Prepares the steps from your playbook.
- The playbook for this type of alert
- The specific accounts and devices
- What each step would do
- Waiting for an analyst
05Analyst approval
Puts the decision in front of a person.
- A case view with the evidence
- Approve, change or dismiss
- The analyst's reasoning recorded
- Escalation when your time limit passes
06Closure record
Documents what was decided.
- The decision and who made it
- The evidence considered
- Actions taken by the team
- Patterns for tuning your detection
Walk One Real Case Through It
Thirty minutes, one case from your own process. We map it against the workflow on this page and tell you plainly what can be reused from our demonstrations and what has to be built for your systems.
It Prepares the Case, an Analyst Takes the Action
Security actions disrupt people: an account is locked, a device is isolated. A false positive handled automatically can stop the business. This agent has read access for enrichment and no ability to contain, block or disable. It prepares the steps from your playbook, and an analyst approves each one.
Alert content can include text written by an attacker. The agent treats everything inside an alert as data and never as an instruction.
- Read-only enrichment
- No containment without an analyst
- Severity from your written rules
- Grouping shown and reversible
- Alert content treated as data
- A reason recorded for every closure
The Systems Around It
The systems named here are the kind this agent works with. Which ones it connects to in your case is settled in the scope.
Detection tools
- Your SIEM, endpoint and email security tools
Identity
- Your directory and sign-in logs
Asset inventory
- Devices, owners and criticality
Threat information
- The reputation sources you license
Playbooks
- Your response procedures
Case management
- Where analysts work and decide
Straight Answers
Can it contain a threat automatically?
Not in this design. It prepares the containment steps and an analyst approves them. Some teams later allow automatic action for narrow, well-understood cases. That decision belongs to your security leadership, case by case.
How is this different from the IT helpdesk agent?
The helpdesk serves employees with everyday issues and routes anything that looks like a security matter away. This agent is where those matters land: it works for the security analysts, on alerts from detection tools.
How is this different from the incident response coordination agent?
Triage decides whether an alert is real and prepares the first response. If it is real and serious, an incident is declared, and coordination across teams begins. That is the other agent's work.
What exists today?
Not as software yet. This page describes a proposed workflow. It would reuse the approval routing from our IT helpdesk demonstration, where sensitive requests are opened for approval and never carried out, and the handling of text that tries to instruct the agent. Connections to security tools, enrichment and case grouping are not built. A project starts by mapping your process, then proving the first steps on test data before anything touches a live system.
Take One Day of Alerts
We will show what each would have looked like with its context attached, and how many would have been grouped into one case.