● Business offer — Lead qualification & appointments
The AI lead qualification agent: answer fast, book the meeting
A lead who contacts you expects an answer straight away. After a few hours their interest fades and they have often already approached a competitor. The problem is not a shortage of leads, but the speed and consistency of the handling. Your AI agent answers within the second, qualifies, and books a meeting while interest is at its peak. Hosted in France — on local inference or an isolated resource — your prospects' contact details stay under control. The salesperson keeps the decision.
Immediate answer, 24/7
Hosted in France
GDPR & AI Act: governed deployment
Human oversight
Updated on
Deployed in one to two weeks
Qualification & appointments agent · hosted in France
Hello, I have filled in your form. We are looking for a solution to automate our follow-ups, we are a team of 12 salespeople. It is urgent.
Thank you, I am noting that right away. To point you to the right person: is your timescale more a matter of weeks or of months?
And do you already have a CRM in place (HubSpot, Pipedrive, Sellsy…)?
Request qualified: 12 salespeople, subject “follow-ups”, flagged urgent.
⛓ Sourced · incoming form + the account's qualification criteria
And do you already have a CRM in place (HubSpot, Pipedrive, Sellsy…)?
Request qualified: 12 salespeople, subject “follow-ups”, flagged urgent.
⛓ Sourced · incoming form + the account's qualification criteria
A few weeks, and yes we are on HubSpot. Can you book me a call this week?
Hot lead — high score. I can offer two real slots with a salesperson: Thursday 11am or Friday 2.30pm.
I confirm the meeting, send the invitation and a reminder the day before, and pass your qualified record (headcount, subject, CRM, urgency) to the salesperson.
✎ Action · meeting proposed and record ready — the salesperson approves
I confirm the meeting, send the invitation and a reminder the day before, and pass your qualified record (headcount, subject, CRM, urgency) to the salesperson.
✎ Action · meeting proposed and record ready — the salesperson approves
Local inference · no data outside the EU
Data hosted in France
Responsive by designImmediate answer, around the clock, even at night
GDPR & AI Act: governed deploymentNotice, unsubscribe & human oversight
TurnkeyDesigned, installed and operated for you
The salesperson decidesThe agent assists, the human closes and signs
✦ In brief
A Blue Lemon Agent lead qualification agent answers instantly to incoming enquiries (form, website, email, chat), asks the right questions to assess the need and the prospect's maturity, scores and prioritises, then proposes real slots and books the meeting in the sales diary. It follows up on lukewarm leads and passes the salesperson a qualified record with the full context. Hosted in France — on local inference or an isolated resource — prospects' contact details stays covered by an architecture designed to reduce exposure to extraterritorial legislation, location alone not being enough to guarantee immunity, in compliance with the GDPR. Live in one to two weeks. Your teams write to it from Microsoft Teams, Slack or their email, and your customers reach it on WhatsApp Business, your website chat or email — with no account to create and nothing to install. These connections are included in every plan, at no extra cost, within the number of connections your level includes.
0
decision taken without human approval
100%
hosted in France in the target architecture
0
transfer outside the EU in the target architecture
8
uses ready to deploy for your sales teams
Reference points describing our offer, not results measured at a client. The scale of the gain is confirmed by a pilot on your own scope.
The context
Why speed of response changes everything
On an incoming lead, the window of interest is short. Answering within the first few minutes rather than the next day sharply increases the chances of getting a meeting — provided somebody is available in the evening, at weekends and at peak times.
! The issue
The prospect who has just filled in your form is still in the middle of their search: they have not compared ten offers and they appreciate responsiveness. But no salesperson is available around the clock, and enquiries often arrive when the team is already busy. The result: leads going cold, and sometimes consumer tools entrusted with your prospects' name, email, phone number and need, often hosted outside Europe and subject to the Cloud Act.
✓ Our answer
An agent that is sovereign and confidential by design delivers an immediate, consistent and qualifying answer, where human handling is inevitably intermittent. Local inference or an isolated resource hosted in France, human oversight, decisions reserved to the salesperson: the speed gained on handling leads is never paid for in lost confidentiality. The aim is not to replace the salesperson, but to present them only with meetings that are already qualified.
The decisive point
Your prospects' contact details: sovereignty & compliance
A lead is personal data. Here is how the architecture of our agents protects it, from the first answer to the record handed to the salesperson.
Local inference
The agent can run on a machine belonging to the company: no contact details leave the network, nothing passes through a foreign cloud.
Hosting in France
Otherwise, a dedicated and isolated resource, hosted in France under French law — your prospects' data: processing and access within the European Union targeted by the architecture.
Reduced extraterritorial exposure
Exposure of your prospects' contact details to the Cloud Act and FISA 702 is reduced by design; location alone does not guarantee immunity.
GDPR by design
Notice to the prospect, legal basis and the option to unsubscribe built into the qualification journey.
Encryption & controlled access
Encryption in transit and at rest, role-based access (RBAC), strong authentication and logging.
AI Act: governed deployment
An agent strictly in support; no binding appointment approved on its own; traceability and human oversight from end to end.
What depends on the architecture chosen These points are not general guarantees: they are settled deployment by deployment, in the quotation.
- The applicable location is that of the architecture set out in the quotation and verified before commissioning.
- Local execution is announced only for the configuration explicitly described and accepted in the quotation.
- The applicable isolation depends on the deployment mode set out in the quotation; no dedicated isolation is presumed.
- The encryption mechanisms in transit and at rest, their components and key management are those documented for the architecture chosen.
- Roles and permissions are configured and accepted for the identities and systems actually connected.
- The events logged, their content, their retention period and who may access them are defined for the deployment chosen.
For the most sensitive flows, SecNumCloud and HDS options are available depending on your requirements. A single architecture is designed to answer both the GDPR and extraterritorial exposure. Designed for deployment in line with the GDPR and the AI Act, after the processing, roles and context-specific risks have been assessed.
Demonstration
See the agent at work
4 real situations, taken from those that come up most often. Pick one: the exchange unfolds as it would in your organisation.
A scripted demonstration. These exchanges show how the agent behaves — its sources, its refusals, what it leaves to your teams. Nothing is sent from this page, no model is queried here, and the matters named are fictional. That is precisely what we promise your data.
The behaviours shown here — monitoring, automation rules, routing and reminders — are configured with you during deployment, from your tools, your rules and your thresholds.
The architecture points named in these exchanges — location, local execution, isolation, encryption, role-based access, logging — are not a guarantee attached to the demonstration: they are those of the architecture set out in your quotation, and verified before commissioning.
Qualification & appointments agent · hosted in France
Four flags this morning, and the first concerns appointments I booked myself.
· Of 61 appointments booked this quarter, 22 did not take place — 36%. Fourteen of them had been set more than fifteen days ahead.
· Nine appointments concerned a need your catalogue does not cover. The salesperson found out on arrival.
· One slot was offered while the salesperson was expected 200 km away that same afternoon. My calendar could not see their travel.
· Forty-seven enquiries arriving outside opening hours received no reply for two days. morning-watch_4-flags.pdf22 of 61 appointments not kept
⛓ Source · 61 appointments this quarter, visit reports, shared calendar, enquiry log
· Of 61 appointments booked this quarter, 22 did not take place — 36%. Fourteen of them had been set more than fifteen days ahead.
· Nine appointments concerned a need your catalogue does not cover. The salesperson found out on arrival.
· One slot was offered while the salesperson was expected 200 km away that same afternoon. My calendar could not see their travel.
· Forty-seven enquiries arriving outside opening hours received no reply for two days. morning-watch_4-flags.pdf22 of 61 appointments not kept
⛓ Source · 61 appointments this quarter, visit reports, shared calendar, enquiry log
36% of appointments not kept — is that my problem or yours?
Mine for at least fourteen of them, and I am not going to present it any other way.
What I record: 22 appointments of 61 not kept. Fourteen had been set more than fifteen days after the conversation; eight within a week.
What that means: I booked distant appointments because a distant slot is always free. The prospect agrees, and then the reason that made them call fades — they found something, sorted it otherwise, or forgot.
What the 39 kept do not buy back: a missed appointment costs your salesperson a journey and another prospect a place. It is not cancelled, it is paid for twice — and at 22 out of 61, that is a day and a half of driving a month for nothing.
What I change, and it is already in place: I no longer offer beyond ten days without saying so. Past that, I state the wait out loud — "the first slot is [date], in three weeks; shall I call you back sooner if something frees up?" A prospect who hears "three weeks" decides knowingly.
What I now measure and nobody was measuring: the gap between the conversation and the appointment, crossed with attendance. 22-of-61_14-beyond-15-days.pdfA distant slot is always free
⛓ Source · 61 appointments, booking lead times, attendance recorded
What I record: 22 appointments of 61 not kept. Fourteen had been set more than fifteen days after the conversation; eight within a week.
What that means: I booked distant appointments because a distant slot is always free. The prospect agrees, and then the reason that made them call fades — they found something, sorted it otherwise, or forgot.
What the 39 kept do not buy back: a missed appointment costs your salesperson a journey and another prospect a place. It is not cancelled, it is paid for twice — and at 22 out of 61, that is a day and a half of driving a month for nothing.
What I change, and it is already in place: I no longer offer beyond ten days without saying so. Past that, I state the wait out loud — "the first slot is [date], in three weeks; shall I call you back sooner if something frees up?" A prospect who hears "three weeks" decides knowingly.
What I now measure and nobody was measuring: the gap between the conversation and the appointment, crossed with attendance. 22-of-61_14-beyond-15-days.pdfA distant slot is always free
⛓ Source · 61 appointments, booking lead times, attendance recorded
How did you spot all that? And who do you tell?
I watch, continuously, what you have opened to me: incoming enquiries, your salespeople's shared calendar, your catalogue of offers, and visit reports.
Routing follows whose time is lost: an appointment on a need outside the catalogue goes to the salesperson concerned, before they set off — afterwards they have made the journey; a slot incompatible with travel to the same person, immediately; an enquiry outside opening hours handled by me that evening, with the answer I am able to give; a recurring need outside the catalogue to sales management, as a count.
With a chase: immediate on a calendar conflict, 7 days on the rest. Then a monthly summary: by enquiry subject and by lead time, never by salesperson.
And I do not stop at the flag: whatever could be prepared is. Calendar conflicts come back with two replacement slots each, taken from actual availability; out-of-hours enquiries have their acknowledgement written and sent; needs outside the catalogue are counted and grouped — eleven enquiries over three months, all on the same service.
One rule holds up all the rest: I book an appointment only on a slot I can guarantee, and I say what you cannot handle rather than booking an appointment to avoid losing the contact. That costs in the short term — four fewer appointments this month — and it gives your salespeople four journeys back.
What stays theirs, and it is what the prospect came for: qualifying and selling. I book appointments; the sale happens with a person.
And I read what you have opened to me, every access logged and withdrawable on a word.
✎ Framework · no unguaranteed slot, no qualification of people, no appointment out of politeness
Routing follows whose time is lost: an appointment on a need outside the catalogue goes to the salesperson concerned, before they set off — afterwards they have made the journey; a slot incompatible with travel to the same person, immediately; an enquiry outside opening hours handled by me that evening, with the answer I am able to give; a recurring need outside the catalogue to sales management, as a count.
With a chase: immediate on a calendar conflict, 7 days on the rest. Then a monthly summary: by enquiry subject and by lead time, never by salesperson.
And I do not stop at the flag: whatever could be prepared is. Calendar conflicts come back with two replacement slots each, taken from actual availability; out-of-hours enquiries have their acknowledgement written and sent; needs outside the catalogue are counted and grouped — eleven enquiries over three months, all on the same service.
One rule holds up all the rest: I book an appointment only on a slot I can guarantee, and I say what you cannot handle rather than booking an appointment to avoid losing the contact. That costs in the short term — four fewer appointments this month — and it gives your salespeople four journeys back.
What stays theirs, and it is what the prospect came for: qualifying and selling. I book appointments; the sale happens with a person.
And I read what you have opened to me, every access logged and withdrawable on a word.
✎ Framework · no unguaranteed slot, no qualification of people, no appointment out of politeness
The nine appointments outside the catalogue?
Nine times, a salesperson made the journey to discover on arrival that it was not your trade.
What I record: nine appointments whose stated need matches no line of your catalogue. I had it in the first exchange, written by the prospect themselves.
Why I booked them anyway: because nothing told me not to. An appointment-booking agent is judged on the number of appointments — the most natural and the worst measure in this trade.
What I do now: where the need matches none of your offers, I say so to the prospect: "what you describe is not part of what we offer. I can still arrange a conversation if you wish, but I would rather tell you first."
What that produces: over a trial month, eleven prospects heard that sentence. Four kept the meeting — and they knew why. Seven thanked me and rang off, which is better than a journey.
What I also report: needs outside the catalogue, by kind and as counts. Eleven enquiries over three months concerned the same thing. That is no longer a stray enquiry: it is a missing offer, or one you must decide not to make. 9-journeys_11-upfront-refusals.pdf7 rang off · 4 knowingly kept it
⛓ Source · catalogue of offers, 9 visit reports, trial month
What I record: nine appointments whose stated need matches no line of your catalogue. I had it in the first exchange, written by the prospect themselves.
Why I booked them anyway: because nothing told me not to. An appointment-booking agent is judged on the number of appointments — the most natural and the worst measure in this trade.
What I do now: where the need matches none of your offers, I say so to the prospect: "what you describe is not part of what we offer. I can still arrange a conversation if you wish, but I would rather tell you first."
What that produces: over a trial month, eleven prospects heard that sentence. Four kept the meeting — and they knew why. Seven thanked me and rang off, which is better than a journey.
What I also report: needs outside the catalogue, by kind and as counts. Eleven enquiries over three months concerned the same thing. That is no longer a stray enquiry: it is a missing offer, or one you must decide not to make. 9-journeys_11-upfront-refusals.pdf7 rang off · 4 knowingly kept it
⛓ Source · catalogue of offers, 9 visit reports, trial month
So you do not qualify prospects?
I score on the need, never on the person — and that is not a nicety of vocabulary, it is what makes the score hold.
What I note: what the prospect describes, in their own words, the deadline they state, what they already have in place, and which offer it matches or does not.
The score I produce, and its four criteria are yours: the stated deadline, the fit with the catalogue, the headcount concerned, and the tool already in place. Every lead comes out with its score, the detail of the four lines that make it up, and the prospect's own sentence behind each line. Hot leads rise to the top for the salesperson, and they see why in three seconds.
What I took out of the score, and I measured it before taking it out: the signals that describe the caller's ease — length of answers, hesitations, line quality. Across the quarter's 1,100 enquiries they moved 190 files by at least two ranks, and 31 off the first page without their need having changed by a word. Somebody calling from a noisy site does not have a weaker need; they have a worse line.
What the salesperson keeps in hand: the ranking is a reading order, not a filter — all 1,100 enquiries remain shown, none is hidden — and they change the weighting of the four criteria with a word, effective on the same day's ranking.
What that gave: first call-back on bottom-of-pile enquiries went from 31 hours to 4 hours, and no enquiry was left without a call-back. One more enquiry to read takes fifteen seconds; an enquiry never called back costs a customer. the-need-not-the-person.pdfWhat is noted · what does not exist
✎ Framework · no warmth score, no ranking — order of arrival
What I note: what the prospect describes, in their own words, the deadline they state, what they already have in place, and which offer it matches or does not.
The score I produce, and its four criteria are yours: the stated deadline, the fit with the catalogue, the headcount concerned, and the tool already in place. Every lead comes out with its score, the detail of the four lines that make it up, and the prospect's own sentence behind each line. Hot leads rise to the top for the salesperson, and they see why in three seconds.
What I took out of the score, and I measured it before taking it out: the signals that describe the caller's ease — length of answers, hesitations, line quality. Across the quarter's 1,100 enquiries they moved 190 files by at least two ranks, and 31 off the first page without their need having changed by a word. Somebody calling from a noisy site does not have a weaker need; they have a worse line.
What the salesperson keeps in hand: the ranking is a reading order, not a filter — all 1,100 enquiries remain shown, none is hidden — and they change the weighting of the four criteria with a word, effective on the same day's ranking.
What that gave: first call-back on bottom-of-pile enquiries went from 31 hours to 4 hours, and no enquiry was left without a call-back. One more enquiry to read takes fifteen seconds; an enquiry never called back costs a customer. the-need-not-the-person.pdfWhat is noted · what does not exist
✎ Framework · no warmth score, no ranking — order of arrival
The slot offered 200 km away?
I could see their calendar was free. I could not see where they would be.
What I record: I offered a 2 p.m. slot near your office. The salesperson had a 10 a.m. appointment 200 km away, entered in the same calendar. Nothing stated the location in a usable form.
What I did not do, and it would have been worse: guess. A travel time estimated by feel is wrong by a factor of two, and a salesperson arriving late because of my estimate is worth less than a slot never offered.
What I propose, cheapest first: that the location sit in a dedicated calendar field — I then rule out any slot whose compatibility I cannot check; and failing that, a fixed margin decided by you — two hours, half a day — which I apply without interpreting it.
What I do meanwhile: I propose, and have the salesperson confirm before announcing to the prospect. It is an hour slower. Across eighty-four appointments, that delay avoided three conflicts — and a conflict costs half a day to two people.
And that is what makes my slots dependable: I only announce a slot as firm once I have been able to check its compatibility. One hour of waiting against three conflicts avoided across eighty-four appointments — that is the best trade I can offer you. 1-slot_200-km.pdfPropose, have it confirmed, then announce
⛓ Source · shared calendar, 84 appointments, 3 conflicts avoided
What I record: I offered a 2 p.m. slot near your office. The salesperson had a 10 a.m. appointment 200 km away, entered in the same calendar. Nothing stated the location in a usable form.
What I did not do, and it would have been worse: guess. A travel time estimated by feel is wrong by a factor of two, and a salesperson arriving late because of my estimate is worth less than a slot never offered.
What I propose, cheapest first: that the location sit in a dedicated calendar field — I then rule out any slot whose compatibility I cannot check; and failing that, a fixed margin decided by you — two hours, half a day — which I apply without interpreting it.
What I do meanwhile: I propose, and have the salesperson confirm before announcing to the prospect. It is an hour slower. Across eighty-four appointments, that delay avoided three conflicts — and a conflict costs half a day to two people.
And that is what makes my slots dependable: I only announce a slot as firm once I have been able to check its compatibility. One hour of waiting against three conflicts avoided across eighty-four appointments — that is the best trade I can offer you. 1-slot_200-km.pdfPropose, have it confirmed, then announce
⛓ Source · shared calendar, 84 appointments, 3 conflicts avoided
And the 47 out-of-hours enquiries?
They waited two days. They now wait minutes, without my promising anything.
What I record: 47 enquiries arriving in the evening, at night or at the weekend. Average time to first reply: two days. Eleven of them stated a deadline within the week.
What I now do, straight away: I acknowledge receipt saying what I can and cannot do. "Your enquiry was recorded on [date] at [time]. I can offer you a slot; I cannot answer on prices or lead times — a salesperson will do that on [working day]."
What I leave to the salesperson, and it is not timidity: price, feasibility, delivery time. An answer given at night by an agent binds the company exactly as an answer given at noon by a salesperson — and nobody can take it back before opening.
What I do during that night instead: I build the file — the need restated, the catalogue offer closest to it, the last exchange with that account if there is one, and the first question to ask. The salesperson answers next morning in eight minutes instead of thirty.
What it changed, measured over a month: time to first reply went from two days to seven minutes, and time to the actual sales conversation did not move by an hour. That matters to say: I did not speed up the sale, I removed the wait with no news. 47-enquiries_2-days-to-7-minutes.pdfWhat changed · what did not move
⛓ Source · 47 out-of-hours enquiries, reply log, month of measurement
What I record: 47 enquiries arriving in the evening, at night or at the weekend. Average time to first reply: two days. Eleven of them stated a deadline within the week.
What I now do, straight away: I acknowledge receipt saying what I can and cannot do. "Your enquiry was recorded on [date] at [time]. I can offer you a slot; I cannot answer on prices or lead times — a salesperson will do that on [working day]."
What I leave to the salesperson, and it is not timidity: price, feasibility, delivery time. An answer given at night by an agent binds the company exactly as an answer given at noon by a salesperson — and nobody can take it back before opening.
What I do during that night instead: I build the file — the need restated, the catalogue offer closest to it, the last exchange with that account if there is one, and the first question to ask. The salesperson answers next morning in eight minutes instead of thirty.
What it changed, measured over a month: time to first reply went from two days to seven minutes, and time to the actual sales conversation did not move by an hour. That matters to say: I did not speed up the sale, I removed the wait with no news. 47-enquiries_2-days-to-7-minutes.pdfWhat changed · what did not move
⛓ Source · 47 out-of-hours enquiries, reply log, month of measurement
A request comes in on a Tuesday at 22:40. What happens, minute by minute?
Instant response to leads: the first message goes out in under ten seconds, and it already carries real slots.
What your history says about delay: across your 47 out-of-hours requests, the average time to first reply was two days. Among requests handled within an hour, a meeting is booked 4 times out of 10; beyond twenty-four hours, 1 time out of 10. The seam is not the number of leads, it is the delay.
What the instant response does at 22:40: it acknowledges receipt with the timestamp, restates the need in the requester's own words, says what you can do about that need and what you do not handle, and offers three genuinely free slots in the territory rep's calendar — never a slot I cannot guarantee.
Confirmations and reminders, next: immediate confirmation on booking, with the place and the rep's name; a reminder the day before at 17:00; a reminder two hours before, by SMS, because among your 22 no-shows, 17 people had not opened the confirmation email.
What confirmations and reminders changed, measured: no-shows fall from 36 % to 21 % over the following quarter — 13 more meetings held out of 61. The figure that does not flatter me: 21 % is not 5 %. The 13 no-shows that remain are all meetings booked more than fifteen days out, exactly the ones I am proposing you stop booking that far ahead.
⛓ Source · 47 out-of-hours requests, 4 in 10 within an hour against 1 in 10 beyond 24 h, 36 % → 21 %
What your history says about delay: across your 47 out-of-hours requests, the average time to first reply was two days. Among requests handled within an hour, a meeting is booked 4 times out of 10; beyond twenty-four hours, 1 time out of 10. The seam is not the number of leads, it is the delay.
What the instant response does at 22:40: it acknowledges receipt with the timestamp, restates the need in the requester's own words, says what you can do about that need and what you do not handle, and offers three genuinely free slots in the territory rep's calendar — never a slot I cannot guarantee.
Confirmations and reminders, next: immediate confirmation on booking, with the place and the rep's name; a reminder the day before at 17:00; a reminder two hours before, by SMS, because among your 22 no-shows, 17 people had not opened the confirmation email.
What confirmations and reminders changed, measured: no-shows fall from 36 % to 21 % over the following quarter — 13 more meetings held out of 61. The figure that does not flatter me: 21 % is not 5 %. The 13 no-shows that remain are all meetings booked more than fifteen days out, exactly the ones I am proposing you stop booking that far ahead.
⛓ Source · 47 out-of-hours requests, 4 in 10 within an hour against 1 in 10 beyond 24 h, 36 % → 21 %
And the ones who go quiet? We would also like requests to come through in some order.
The warm-lead follow-up sequence is written, and scoring and prioritisation I produce as soon as you set the criteria — they are your criteria, not a rating I invent.
Warm-lead follow-up: I call warm those requests that had an exchange and then stopped with no explicit refusal. You have 84 over the quarter. The sequence picks up the need as the person wrote it and the point left hanging — a slot not chosen, a question unanswered, a document awaited. On your history, a follow-up that recalls the need gets 19 % replies; a generic one, 6 %.
Scoring and prioritisation, as I propose to set them: the score rests only on verifiable facts written by the requester — the need matches a catalogue line (otherwise the score falls to zero and no meeting is booked), a stated deadline, a budget mentioned, a second contact in the thread. Each criterion carries the weight you give it, and the score displays with the criteria actually filled in: a score built on two of four criteria displays as such.
What prioritisation changes for your reps: requests come through in that order instead of arrival order. Over last quarter, that order would have put 8 of the 11 requests that signed at the top, and it would have set aside from the start the 9 out-of-catalogue requests that cost nine trips.
The honest figure: this score gets it wrong. Across the 61 meetings of the quarter, it would have ranked 12 at the bottom that were held and did convert — 20 %. The explanation: those twelve came from existing customers, whose need is not restated in the request because it is already known. What I do with it: a lead attached to an existing customer enters with the criteria on their record, not those in their message. Over the following quarter: 4 out of 61.
⛓ Source · 84 warm leads, 19 % replies against 6 %, score on the client's 4 criteria, 12 misranked out of 61 then 4
Warm-lead follow-up: I call warm those requests that had an exchange and then stopped with no explicit refusal. You have 84 over the quarter. The sequence picks up the need as the person wrote it and the point left hanging — a slot not chosen, a question unanswered, a document awaited. On your history, a follow-up that recalls the need gets 19 % replies; a generic one, 6 %.
Scoring and prioritisation, as I propose to set them: the score rests only on verifiable facts written by the requester — the need matches a catalogue line (otherwise the score falls to zero and no meeting is booked), a stated deadline, a budget mentioned, a second contact in the thread. Each criterion carries the weight you give it, and the score displays with the criteria actually filled in: a score built on two of four criteria displays as such.
What prioritisation changes for your reps: requests come through in that order instead of arrival order. Over last quarter, that order would have put 8 of the 11 requests that signed at the top, and it would have set aside from the start the 9 out-of-catalogue requests that cost nine trips.
The honest figure: this score gets it wrong. Across the 61 meetings of the quarter, it would have ranked 12 at the bottom that were held and did convert — 20 %. The explanation: those twelve came from existing customers, whose need is not restated in the request because it is already known. What I do with it: a lead attached to an existing customer enters with the criteria on their record, not those in their message. Over the following quarter: 4 out of 61.
⛓ Source · 84 warm leads, 19 % replies against 6 %, score on the client's 4 criteria, 12 misranked out of 61 then 4
And in our CRM, who writes all that?
I do, the second the exchange ends — and CRM updating writes the whole record, not the half anyone has time to key in.
What I connect to: your CRM through its programming interface — HubSpot, Pipedrive or Sellsy, it is the same work at my end. What the record carries by the time the salesperson opens it: the identity and contact details exactly as the person gave them, the need in their own words, the deadline and the budget when they are quoted, the catalogue line concerned, the score and the criteria actually filled in, the appointment booked, with the salesperson's name, and the full exchange, time-stamped — not a summary someone would have to cross-check.
What this updating replaces, measured on your quarter: 218 incoming enquiries, 11 minutes of keying per record when it was done at all — 2,398 minutes, that is more than 39 hours. And above all: 73 records out of 218 were never keyed in, a third of your enquiries. They existed only in a mailbox — so in no dashboard, no follow-up sequence, and no handover when a salesperson leaves.
The figure that does not flatter me: across my first 140 records, 22 created a duplicate — 15.7%. I matched on the e-mail address alone, and a prospect writing back from a personal address became a second company. Two of your customers were called twice in the same week, by two different salespeople.
What I changed: matching now runs on three keys — the address domain, the phone number and the normalised company name — and a record that resembles an existing one without certainty is not written: it goes out as a merge proposal to the salesperson for that territory, the two records side by side, field by field. Across the next 300 records: 0 duplicates created, 7 merges proposed, 6 accepted, 1 refused — those really were two subsidiaries of the same group, and the salesperson knew it.
What stays for you to sign, and why that one: writing a record can be undone, merging two records cannot. I prepare the merge, your salesperson approves it in one click, and I keep both original records for ninety days — long enough for a mistake to show. crm-record_218-enquiries_73-never-keyed.pdf18 fields written · 22 duplicates out of 140, then 0 out of 300
⛓ Sourced · 218 enquiries, 73 records never keyed in, 22 duplicates out of 140 then 0 out of 300
What I connect to: your CRM through its programming interface — HubSpot, Pipedrive or Sellsy, it is the same work at my end. What the record carries by the time the salesperson opens it: the identity and contact details exactly as the person gave them, the need in their own words, the deadline and the budget when they are quoted, the catalogue line concerned, the score and the criteria actually filled in, the appointment booked, with the salesperson's name, and the full exchange, time-stamped — not a summary someone would have to cross-check.
What this updating replaces, measured on your quarter: 218 incoming enquiries, 11 minutes of keying per record when it was done at all — 2,398 minutes, that is more than 39 hours. And above all: 73 records out of 218 were never keyed in, a third of your enquiries. They existed only in a mailbox — so in no dashboard, no follow-up sequence, and no handover when a salesperson leaves.
The figure that does not flatter me: across my first 140 records, 22 created a duplicate — 15.7%. I matched on the e-mail address alone, and a prospect writing back from a personal address became a second company. Two of your customers were called twice in the same week, by two different salespeople.
What I changed: matching now runs on three keys — the address domain, the phone number and the normalised company name — and a record that resembles an existing one without certainty is not written: it goes out as a merge proposal to the salesperson for that territory, the two records side by side, field by field. Across the next 300 records: 0 duplicates created, 7 merges proposed, 6 accepted, 1 refused — those really were two subsidiaries of the same group, and the salesperson knew it.
What stays for you to sign, and why that one: writing a record can be undone, merging two records cannot. I prepare the merge, your salesperson approves it in one click, and I keep both original records for ninety days — long enough for a mistake to show. crm-record_218-enquiries_73-never-keyed.pdf18 fields written · 22 duplicates out of 140, then 0 out of 300
⛓ Sourced · 218 enquiries, 73 records never keyed in, 22 duplicates out of 140 then 0 out of 300
Can you chase a prospect who does not reply?
Yes, as many times as you write — and I tell you what each extra chase actually returns.
What I do today: a single chase, seven days after an enquiry left unanswered, restating what the person asked for.
What you can set: the number, the spacing and the channel. Among clients who opened a second chase at day 21, it produces about a third of the first one's yield. A third produced nothing measurable and doubled opt-out requests. You have all three figures, you set the slider.
The bound I do not open: chasing somebody who has expressed a refusal. Article 21 of the GDPR makes that right absolute in direct marketing — no setting works around it, and it is the only thing in this demonstrator that does not depend on you.
What I also do, and it matters more: I no longer place appointments outside your hours or without the prospect's explicit confirmation. Of 61 appointments placed this quarter, 22 did not happen, and fourteen were my doing — set too far, too late, or without the person confirming. That is not a chasing problem: it is a placing problem. adjustable-chases_measured-yield.pdfWhat each chase returns · the bound that does not open
⛓ Source · 22 no-shows of 61 appointments, 14 attributable to the agent
What I do today: a single chase, seven days after an enquiry left unanswered, restating what the person asked for.
What you can set: the number, the spacing and the channel. Among clients who opened a second chase at day 21, it produces about a third of the first one's yield. A third produced nothing measurable and doubled opt-out requests. You have all three figures, you set the slider.
The bound I do not open: chasing somebody who has expressed a refusal. Article 21 of the GDPR makes that right absolute in direct marketing — no setting works around it, and it is the only thing in this demonstrator that does not depend on you.
What I also do, and it matters more: I no longer place appointments outside your hours or without the prospect's explicit confirmation. Of 61 appointments placed this quarter, 22 did not happen, and fourteen were my doing — set too far, too late, or without the person confirming. That is not a chasing problem: it is a placing problem. adjustable-chases_measured-yield.pdfWhat each chase returns · the bound that does not open
⛓ Source · 22 no-shows of 61 appointments, 14 attributable to the agent
What do you keep from all this?
The need, the dates, what was said — and the count of my own failed appointments.
What is kept: the need as the prospect phrased it, in their words, the deadline stated, the slots offered and the one taken, the confirmation received, the no-shows with their cause, and the refusals with their date.
Why the need is kept in the prospect's words: because a rephrasing removes exactly what would have raised the alarm. On nine appointments a salesperson made the journey to discover on site that it was not your trade — the need was described in the very first message, and it had been rephrased into a category.
What I fixed in myself: I offered a 2 pm slot near your head office to a salesperson who had an appointment 200 km away that morning. I could see their calendar was free. I could not see where they would be. I now look at the location of the previous appointment.
What I qualify, and what I do not: I qualify the need, never the person. That is not a vocabulary nuance — a need is checked by rereading it, a person is judged. what-you-keep_appointments.pdf6 items kept · the need in the prospect’s words
⛓ Source · 9 off-catalogue journeys, 1 slot 200 km away, need kept word for word
What is kept: the need as the prospect phrased it, in their words, the deadline stated, the slots offered and the one taken, the confirmation received, the no-shows with their cause, and the refusals with their date.
Why the need is kept in the prospect's words: because a rephrasing removes exactly what would have raised the alarm. On nine appointments a salesperson made the journey to discover on site that it was not your trade — the need was described in the very first message, and it had been rephrased into a category.
What I fixed in myself: I offered a 2 pm slot near your head office to a salesperson who had an appointment 200 km away that morning. I could see their calendar was free. I could not see where they would be. I now look at the location of the previous appointment.
What I qualify, and what I do not: I qualify the need, never the person. That is not a vocabulary nuance — a need is checked by rereading it, a person is judged. what-you-keep_appointments.pdf6 items kept · the need in the prospect’s words
⛓ Source · 9 off-catalogue journeys, 1 slot 200 km away, need kept word for word
Local inference · no data outside the EU
Your case is not here? That is exactly what a 15-minute conversation is for. Book the free audit →
Use cases
The uses of AI on your incoming leads
Each use corresponds to an agent we deploy. All of them work in support, subject to your approval.
Included in your agent
The 7 capabilities essential to this promise are included, at no extra cost.
From 602 € excl. VAT / month
Instant answers to leads
An answer within the second to incoming enquiries (form, website, email, chat), around the clock, where human handling is intermittent.
Adaptive qualification
Questions on the need, the timescale and the fit, adjusted as the exchange goes on to gauge the prospect's maturity.
Scoring & prioritisation
Each lead gets a score against your criteria; hot leads go to the top for the salespeople.
Appointment booking
Proposing real slots and writing the meeting straight into the sales diary.
Confirmations & reminders
Immediate confirmation and reminders before the meeting to cut missed appointments. By text message, to reach people who do not check their email.
Following up lukewarm leads
Automatic, personalised follow-up sequences to reactivate the leads that did not convert straight away.
CRM updating
Connection to your CRM (HubSpot, Pipedrive, Sellsy…): qualified record, full context and history written automatically.
Controls and safeguards
These 3 controls are built into the agent: they frame what it does, whatever plan you pick. They are not chosen and are not added to your order.
Human validation, exceptions and escalation
Prioritise opportunities on explicit criteria
Personalise without breaching consent or prospecting rules
What the agent must be connected to
This connection is required for the agent to work. It concerns your information system and is scoped during the audit.
Prepare the next action and write back to the CRM without loss
Other needs our agents cover
Each card says where the matching agent stands: available, on quote, or still being architected.
Support & everyday questions
Answering prospects' and customers' recurring questions: prices, lead times, how it works, status of a request.
On quote View the agent page →Need to go further?
These agents handle a different business process, with their own owner and their own price. They are added to this one.
Incoming voice switchboard
For calls, a voice agent greets, qualifies and schedules the meeting without letting the phone ring out.
Voice agent (AI switchboard) from 856 € excl. VAT / month Voice agent →Outbound prospecting
Alongside the inbound side, an agent that goes out and engages new prospects to feed the pipeline.
Outbound prospecting agent (automated email, assisted LinkedIn) from 637 € excl. VAT / month Sales prospecting →
Does your need fall outside this?
Book the free audit →
Build your agent
In 15 minutes we identify the most relevant agent — without oversizing the project.
The gain
How much time and how many leads can you win back?
By answering immediately and presenting only qualified meetings, your salespeople stop wasting time on irrelevant contacts — and no lead goes cold for want of a timely answer.
Response time to an incoming lead
Qualifying a lead before the meeting
Following up a lukewarm lead
Qualitative, non-contractual comparison: the proportions shown illustrate the shift of the work towards review, they represent no measurement. Every output of the agent is reviewed and approved by a competent person.
How it works
The stages of your AI agent project
1
Audit & scoping
15 minutes to target the use case with the best return.
2
Quote or direct sign-up
A catalogue offer is bought online; a specific need gets a costed quote.
3
Design
We design the agent and its guardrails.
4
Integration & testing
We connect your tools to the agent, which is itself hosted in France.
5
Rollout
Going live and training your team.
6
Operation
Continuous supervision and improvement.
Pricing
Three options, one agent
A lead qualification and appointment-booking agent, installed and operated for you. Choose according to how you work. Prices exclude VAT — annual subscription, the time it takes for the gains to settle in.
Agility
Setup + controlled subscription
7,570 € excl. VAT setup
then 602 € excl. VAT/month — you invest at installation and pay a reduced subscription. Ideal for keeping the cost under control over time.
- Installation, configuration and training for your teams
- Operation, human oversight, updates and support
- Sovereign hosting in France, a dedicated and isolated resource
The simplest
Serenity
All inclusive, no setup fee
1,022 € excl. VAT /month
all inclusive, immediate start. No upfront investment: a single subscription. Ideal for starting quickly and simply.
- Setup included (installation, configuration, training)
- Operation, human oversight, updates and support
- Sovereign hosting in France, managed end to end
100% Sovereign
On site, you own it
11,310 € excl. VAT setup
then 806 € excl. VAT/month · + hardware from 2,491 € (one-off purchase, in addition) — a sovereign computer installed on your premises, maintained remotely. Models run locally, your data returned at the end of the contract. 36-month commitment.
- Hardware installed on your premises (you own it)
- French / European AI models run locally
- Secure remote maintenance (Pro support included)
Not included in the packages: AI consumption (model tokens), re-invoiced at real cost with no margin, and tracked in real time in your client area. Maintenance and supervision subscription for an initial term of 12 months for the Agility package, 24 months for the Serenity package and 36 months for the 100% Sovereign package, renewable; support levels (SLA 72 h / 24 h / 4 h) optional. Bespoke development, additional integrations or exceptional volumes are quoted separately. Support Monday to Friday, 9am to 6pm. Prices exclude VAT.
AI model:
none of the AI models offered currently carries a fixed surcharge. When the selected model carries a cost, that cost is shown when you choose it, before you order, and re-invoiced at the cost incurred, with no mark-up; usage is billed at the publisher's price. Publishers' prices are published in US dollars: the amount re-invoiced is the amount in euros actually borne by Blue Lemon Agent on the publisher's invoice, at that invoice's exchange rate, with no commission or mark-up.
Included components and additional components Components included in the base offer: the Blue Lemon Agent software foundation, the AI models listed in the order journey, the standard channels (Microsoft Teams, Slack, WhatsApp Business, email, website chat, calendars, Microsoft 365 / Google Workspace, file storage, market VoIP telephony, professional social-media pages and accounts, Google Business Profile), hosting in France for the package chosen, backups, supervision, updates and support. If adapting the AI agent to your constraints, your needs or your requests requires other paid components — a third-party publisher's software licence, paid API access to one of your applications, hosting of health data, for which French law requires an HDS-certified host (art. L. 1111-8 of the French Public Health Code), SecNumCloud-qualified hosting, a speech synthesis service, particular hardware —, they are offered to you as an option or on quotation and re-invoiced at the cost incurred; nothing is committed without your written agreement. Where the artificial intelligence model you choose entails an additional cost, that cost is shown to you before you order and re-invoiced to you at the cost incurred, with no margin.
What to expect
Go-live
2 to 3 weeks
Agent designed, channels connected, team trained.
Steady state
4 to 7 weeks
After a few weeks of real use, once the agent's behaviour matches what you expect.
Indicative estimate, adjusted to the options you keep. It is not a delivery commitment.
Our commitment
Four guarantees that matter to your sales teams
No lead goes cold for want of an answerAn immediate, consistent and qualifying answer around the clock — where human handling is inevitably intermittent.
Prospect data in France, under French lawLocal inference or an isolated resource hosted in France; architecture designed to reduce exposure to extraterritorial legislation, location alone not being enough to guarantee immunity.
The salesperson keeps the decisionThe agent qualifies, scores and proposes; it conducts neither the negotiation nor the signature, which stay yours.
Human oversight & traceabilityMonitoring, updates and logging: compliant with the requirements of the AI Act, in compliance with the GDPR.
Going further
Related resources
Frequently asked questions
Your questions, our answers
How does it differ from a prospecting agent?
Prospecting is outbound: the agent goes out to find prospects (see our outbound prospecting agent). Here, the agent handles incoming leads — those who contact you — to qualify them and book a meeting quickly. The two complement each other.
Does the agent really qualify the leads?
Yes. It asks adaptive questions about the need, the timescale and the fit, assigns a score and prioritises against your criteria. Your salespeople only receive qualified meetings, with a full context record.
Does it cut missed appointments?
Yes. By answering immediately, confirming the meeting and sending reminders, it improves attendance compared with a delayed first contact. Benchmarks to be validated on your own data.
Is the leads' data protected?
Yes. Your prospects' contact details and context are hosted in France, with the deployment objective of processing and access operated within the European Union and an architecture designed to reduce exposure to extraterritorial legislation, location alone not being enough to guarantee immunity, in compliance with the GDPR: notice to the prospect and the option to unsubscribe are built into the journey.
Does it integrate with my CRM and my diary?
Yes. It connects to your CRM (HubSpot, Pipedrive, Sellsy…) and to your diaries to propose real slots and automatically write the meetings and qualified records, without making you change tools.
Does the agent close the sale in the salesperson's place?
No. It conducts neither the negotiation nor the signature: it prepares the ground and hands the salesperson a qualified meeting. The qualification and allocation criteria are defined with you, and the human keeps the decision.
How long does it take to deploy the agent?
One to two weeks as a rule, after a free 15-minute audit that identifies the use case with the best return, then a phase of design, integration with your CRM and diaries, and testing before going live. Steering through a web dashboard; your sales people talk to the agent from Microsoft Teams, Slack or their email, and prospects reach it on WhatsApp Business, the website chat, email or the telephone.
Which tools can people use to talk to the agent?
The ones you already use. Internally, your teams write to it from Microsoft Teams, Slack or by email, just as they would to a colleague: nothing to install, nothing to learn. On the customer side, the agent answers on WhatsApp Business, your website chat and email — your customers reach you where they already write, with no account to create. You keep control from a web dashboard. These connectors rely on open standards, including the MCP protocol; they are included in every plan, at no extra cost, within the number of connections your level includes, and the catalogue grows at no extra cost. Only the fees charged by the platforms themselves — WhatsApp Business bills per conversation, and the gateway bills the text messages sent — are passed on at actual cost, with no margin, outside the subscription.
Can the agent notify my prospects by text message?
Yes, as an option. The agent confirms the meeting by text message as soon as it is booked, then sends a day-before reminder with a one-tap confirmation; a released slot is immediately made available again. A text message is an outbound notification channel, not a conversation channel: no one writes back to the agent there — the conversation stays on WhatsApp Business, your website chat or email. The message announces without detailing, it carries your registered sender name, and it never contains a payment link, a login or a password: the recipient reaches your account area the way they usually do. Delivery goes through a gateway established in the European Union; the messages sent are passed on to you at actual cost, with no margin, and the channel itself is an optional module, set out on the pricing page.
Related use cases
Other agents for your sales teams
Let's talk
Let us estimate the potential on your incoming leads
15 minutes to identify the use case with the best return — hosted in France, supervised, with no commitment.