PSU Annual Report Preparation With Agents

Every winter a CPSE communications cell discovers that last year's prose is still in the template and this year's numbers are still in someone's inbox. The temptation is to point a model at everything and ask for a report. That is how you publish a production figure the plant does not recognise.

This case is a composite of a disciplined drafting desk: company secretariat, finance, and a writer, with an agent that may only see extracts that already carry a certifying officer's name. We will not invent DPE page limits or SEBI timelines. Those instruments change. Open them when you file.

If you are listed, price-sensitive drafting is a disclosure problem, not a style problem. Keep the tenant on-prem and the circulation list boring.

The composite desk

Finance issued a locked extract: tables with source, date, and a named officer. Plants issued a locked extract for physicals the same way. The agent drafted only against those tables and last year's approved prose for structure. It could not browse mail.

Every number in the draft carried a pointer back to a cell in the extract. If the model wanted a number that was not in the extract, it left a hole. Holes are honest. Invented precision is not.

Company secretariat owned the calendar. The agent did not. Missed statutory dates are not an NLP failure.

What went well

• Boilerplate on composition of committees, once the CS certified the list.
• Plain-language restatements of tables already signed.
• A consistency check: a figure that appeared twice with two different units was flagged.
• Language versions only after the English numbers were frozen.

What was forbidden

• Forecasts the board had not approved.
• CSR impact stories that named beneficiaries from a spreadsheet.
• Safety statistics the safety officer had not signed.
• Any comparison to an unsourced industry percentage — including vendor title-bank figures.
• Training the model on unpublished board minutes.

Audit-committee eyes

Internal audit sampled ten numbers and ten claims. They did not sample BLEU. If a claim had no extract pointer, it died. That sampling is what made the desk safe enough to repeat.

Statutory auditors will not accept the model said. Keep working papers as you already do. The agent is a typist with a memory of the extract.

Objections you will hear — and what to do with them

These are the lines that stall the file. Answer them in the room, then put the answer in the note.

We will miss the printer slot

Then start the extracts earlier. A model cannot manufacture a certified table. Printers have seen slips. Readers have seen wrong tonnes.

Directors want a warmer tone

Tone after numbers freeze. Warmth that changes a claim is a disclosure event.

Can we feed analyst transcripts

Only if counsel says those texts are allowed in this draft and are not a back door for unpublished numbers. Default to no.

Subsidiaries will never send locked extracts

Then their chapters stay human and late. Do not scrape their intranet as a workaround.

Four weeks before the first draft goes to directors

1. Week 1: list every table you must publish. Name the certifying officer for each. No officer, no table.
2. Week 2: land locked extracts in an on-prem store. Build pointer-mandatory drafting. Ban mail-browse.
3. Week 3: draft two chapters only. Internal audit samples numbers. Kill any unsourced comparative.
4. Week 4: freeze numbers. Then tone and translation. Keep the agent off the frozen file except for consistency checks.

How this shows up in the file

Subject: Agent use in annual-report drafting.

Agents may draft narrative only from extracts certified by named officers. Every figure shall point at an extract cell. Holes are preferred to invention. Unsourced industry percentages are prohibited.

The agent shall not set the statutory calendar or train on unpublished minutes. This note is an internal aid. It is not legal or disclosure advice.

Listed and unlisted, same holes

Unlisted CPSEs still sign numbers. Listed ones add disclosure risk. In both cases the desk is the same: locked extracts, pointers, no title-bank comparatives. If the comms cell wants a growth story, they write it after the tables freeze and they own it.

Prcept AI will not browse mail. We will leave holes. We will refuse unsourced 22% cousins. If that makes the layout ugly, the layout was lying.

Translations only after the numbers freeze

Hindi and other language versions are political facts in many CPSEs. They are also a way to re-introduce a tonne. Freeze the English (or the primary signed language) tables first. Then translate. If the model invents a unit or rounds a crore to make a sentence scan, the translation is a new unaudited table. A human who can read both languages signs the pair.

Photographs and captions are another hole. A caption that says a plant 'achieved record output' is a claim. It needs the same pointer as a table, or it does not run. Do not let the comms intern ask the model to write punchy captions from last year's PDF.

When the printer asks for a last-minute fill, the answer is a hole or a delay. Last-minute fills are how last year's specific energy consumption becomes this year's. Internal audit should be invited to that argument once, in week three, so it does not happen at 11 p.m. in week eight.

This article is informational field guidance for Indian public institutions, not legal, procurement, security-accreditation, engineering or board advice. Confirm against the live Gazette, GFR, GeM term, CVC instruction, CERT-In direction, UIDAI regulation, DPE guideline, DPDP text, departmental charter, plant safety manual and your counsel before you file it.

How this clears vigilance and the board

A P1 CIO/CTO in a PSU will meet CVC-shaped questions even when there is no special 'AI circular'. “PSU Annual Report Preparation With Agents” has to survive a technical committee, a cost centre, and a union conversation if jobs appear threatened.

An annual report is a signed object. The agent may assemble narrative from numbers finance already certified. It may not invent a tonne or a rupee. OT networks stay off-limits. Navratna autonomy speeds buying; it does not waive DPDP or data classification. IREPS is not GeM. RBI-shaped rules still localise payment data.

• Classify data before the POC.
• Keep agents off OT.
• Write the board memo with residual risk.
• Engage unions on retrieval vs replacement.

Close this loop before the next CAB

Put “PSU Annual Report Preparation With Agents” on the next change-advisory or bid-opening agenda as a single line item with an owner. If it cannot earn a line item, it will not earn a control. The owner should be a P1 CIO/CTO, not “the vendor.”

Revisit the item when the model, the GeM term, the region, or the SI changes. “annual report automation PSU” is not a one-time workshop. It is a watch item. Date the last check. Unsigned watch items are souvenirs.

What must be true before you file this

If “PSU Annual Report Preparation With Agents” is only a heading, it will not survive a file inspection. A P1 CIO/CTO should be able to attach one artefact that proves “annual report automation PSU”: a log export, a clause, a scored row, a dated notice, or a refusal rule.

Write three dated sentences: what was decided, who owns it, and when it will be re-checked. Unsigned sentences are souvenirs. Dated sentences are controls.

• Name the owner of “annual report automation PSU” inside the institution.
• Attach one artefact a stranger can open next year.
• Revisit when the model, the notice, or the SI changes.
• Do not treat a vendor slide as evidence.

One more artefact before you close the file

Add a one-page owner map: who runs this after the vendor leaves, who can stop it, and where the logs live. If those three names are missing, the project is still a demo.

Date the page. File it next to the contract. That is the difference between a blog you read and a control you can audit.

If you cannot export the last month of traces into the department SIEM without the vendor, you do not own the workflow. Own the traces before you expand the use case.

What the next file must contain

“PSU Annual Report Preparation With Agents” earns a line in the noting only if a P1 CIO/CTO can attach proof of “annual report automation PSU.” A heading is not proof. A vendor slide is not proof. A workshop photograph is not proof.

Write three dated sentences: what was decided, who owns it after the next posting order, and when it will be re-checked. If you cannot write the three sentences, you are not ready to buy, to sell, or to go live.

Leave unsourced percentages out of the note. DPDP is not a blanket localisation statute. The November 2025 AI governance text is guidance, not an Act. CERT-In’s 28 April 2022 directions still set specified incident and log clocks. A PAC, when lawful, lives in GFR Rule 166.

• Name the designation that owns “annual report automation PSU.”
• Attach one artefact a stranger can open next year.
• Record the instrument you are actually using.
• Revisit when the model, the SI, the notice or the posting changes.