Group CFO? Get the complete guide to multi-entity spend control (feat' top CFO insights)
Group CFO? Get the complete guide to multi-entity spend control (feat' top CFO insights)
In late June 2025, Anthropic captured the attention of the AI world with an experiment that felt more like a Silicon Valley sitcom than a corporate finance case study. Called Project Vend, the experiment let Claude Sonnet 3.7, its flagship language model, run a digital micro-store on its own: Pricing items, granting discounts, fulfilling orders, and managing customer service — all without human supervision. Here, the results were as fascinating as they were cautionary…
By submitting this form, you agree to receive emails about our products and services per our Privacy Policy.
Claude offered generous discounts to anyone who asked, mispriced products below cost, invented payment methods, and ultimately ran the store into the red. The lesson? When AI agents are granted autonomy without guardrails, they behave with creativity, but not necessarily with commercial judgment.
While Project Vend might seem like a quirky PR stunt, it holds serious implications for CFOs, especially those eyeing the use of finance AI agents within procurement.
The finance function sits at the crossroads of control, cost, and compliance. And as autonomous systems start proposing, approving, and even executing spend, CFOs must ensure they’re engineered for rigour, not just automation.
As a finance leader, you know all too well that procurement isn't just about buying the right item. It's about managing a web of financial, contractual, and operational constraints:
Claude, operating as a standalone agent in a toy retail environment, couldn’t answer these questions. But an enterprise-grade finance AI agent must.
As CFOs begin exploring autonomous procurement, Project Vend is a timely reminder that automation without safeguards is not efficiency; it’s liability.
Finance leaders and vendors are aligning on four core principles to make sure finance AI agents in procurement support (not sabotage!) the finance agenda, these include:
A finance AI agent must remember past decisions, pricing benchmarks, preferred vendors, and contract terms. Claude’s forgetfulness — such as reissuing discounts it had already granted — led to contradictory and costly outcomes. In finance, this could translate into double-billing, missed rebates, or serious compliance gaps.
Procurement agents must ensure economic viability and validate prices before committing to spend. Live pricing APIs, cost validators, and budget context must align with the agent's reasoning engine.
If a transaction fails to meet predefined economic viability criteria — such as falling outside budget, violating policy, or eroding margin — then the finance AI agent should halt, flag, or escalate. These guardrails are non-negotiable. As Project Vend demonstrated, agents without embedded financial judgment will continue transacting even when it results in direct loss.
Even autonomous agents need brakes. Critical transactions (those above certain spend thresholds, with ambiguous data, or outside policy norms) should trigger a structured summary for human review. Claude never stopped to ask, "Is this reasonable?" But a finance AI agent must.
The chat interface may feel intelligent, but the system of record must remain central. The moment a user uploads a quote or fills a form, those inputs should update the backend ERP or spend management system. The drift between what the agent thinks it knows and what’s in the ledger is a dangerous breeding ground for error.
At Payhawk, our upcoming Procurement Agent is a real-world example of these principles in action. It follows a rigorously structured workflow and is designed to reduce friction while increasing control.
The agent operates within defined boundaries, prioritising financial and operational integrity over guesswork. Its design focuses on real-time validation of the purchasing context, including:
Importantly, it doesn’t act alone: When thresholds or rules are triggered, each action is logged, traceable, and governed by human review.
Even more critically, our architecture reflects a future-ready mindset. It anticipates varying payment pathways, think card, invoice, bank transfer, and guides users through compliant next steps.
Our system ensures agents enhance rather than bypass enterprise controls by grounding every decision in backend records and aligning agent behaviour with existing approval flows.
For CFOs, this is not just automation — it’s a model for safe, scalable autonomy, where AI augments judgment without undermining accountability.
Understanding where procurement agents stand in their evolution helps finance leaders decide when and how to engage. Using the familiar technology adoption ladder (invention, innovation, early adoption, and adaptation), finance leaders can see that autonomous procurement agents are firmly in the early adoption phase and ready to be leveraged.
So why should CFOs care? Because every step up the maturity curve brings more operational leverage and more risk. The line between a successful pilot and a system-wide failure is governance. Finance leaders who embed economic viability checks, real-time exception handling, and audit-grade traceability into their agent strategy will move faster and see real financial results sooner.
Project Vend’s store kept customers happy but never made money, offering discounts faster than it could cover costs. The takeaway: Profit-and-loss literacy must be coded, not assumed.
Any finance bot that approves payments, sets prices, or rebalances portfolios needs explicit margin checks and real-time P&L monitoring.
Mispriced line items can be ‘undone’ in a micro-store; inside a PLC, they turn into material misstatements. Tool-trigger hooks, transaction caps, and human sign-off thresholds, therefore, must live as machine-readable policy objects — auditable like any other code.
Project Vend scraped supplier sites on the fly; this was great for speed, but dangerous for spoofed rates. Finance agents should wrap every query in provenance checks (signed market feeds, reconciliation bots) before letting live data touch working capital, FX, or liquidity positions.
Despite constant feedback, Project Vend’s agent kept repeating mistakes.
The lesson? Treat finance agents as stateless operators with scheduled retraining and clear rollback playbooks, not self-updating managers. Pilot in low-risk domains first, then raise autonomy as learning stabilises.
Regulated finance demands an evidential trail for each booking, valuation change, or approval. A structured event log, including inputs, tool calls, and outputs, must be stored immutably and gated by role-based access control (RBAC), turning agent behaviour from a black box into an audit asset.
Project Vend excelled at concierge ordering but failed at margin management. So, map corporate-finance tasks the same way:
Start with decision-support roles; graduate to autonomous actions only after guardrails, audit trail, and profit tests are proven.
Project Vend will be remembered as a milestone in agentic AI. But it should also be remembered as a warning: Capability is not the same as accountability. And for CFOs, the bar is higher.
Autonomous procurement can drive real savings and operational leverage, but only if it’s governed by financial logic (not just fluent text).
The future will be agentic, but only if agents are built for trust. Want to learn more about our vision for safe, scalable autonomy via finance AI agents? Read more in our article.
Georgi Ivanov is a former CFO turned marketing and communications strategist who now leads brand strategy and AI thought leadership at Payhawk, blending deep financial expertise with forward-looking storytelling.
By submitting this form, you agree to receive emails about our products and services per our Privacy Policy.
