Day 3 of the close. The analyst downloads the bank statement, imports it into Cash Management and runs AutoReconciliation in EBS. Whatever doesn't reconcile goes into a spreadsheet, and the spreadsheet goes by email to treasury with a question for each item. The answers come back one at a time, by email or chat, and the analyst enters them by hand.
Statement → Cash Management → spreadsheet → email → treasury → answer → manual entry
Much of the time in this process goes into getting the information needed to understand each item and waiting for someone to reply. An AI agent can build the spreadsheet, look up some data or draft the email without anything else changing. But if resolving the item still depends on an answer from treasury, you're still waiting.
In its March 2025 global survey on AI, McKinsey looked at 25 attributes and found that redesigning workflows had the strongest link to EBIT impact from the use of generative AI.
I'd start with the unreconciled items
I wouldn't touch reconciliation at first. I'd use the agent to investigate the items left open: search EBS or Fusion, and any other sources it's given access to, for information that explains each item, and propose an answer with the related document or transaction.
Treasury gets that proposal and confirms or corrects it from the same queue. The analyst no longer has to build the spreadsheet and email it. They review the items the agent couldn't explain and, where it makes sense, adjust the reconciliation rules.
At first I wouldn't let it reconcile items, create journal entries or change data. I'd track how many items are still open on day 3 and how many proposals treasury accepts without changes. Also how long an item takes from the moment it's left open until someone explains it.
After each close I'd look closely at the proposals treasury corrected. That shows you where the agent is misreading a reference, a bank concept or a document. If after several closes the corrections are few and you understand why they happen, only then would I consider which specific actions to let it execute in the ERP.
Before developing anything, I'd also check what Oracle already covers in your release. In Fusion it's worth reviewing each update, because Oracle keeps adding these capabilities to its Cash Processing Agent. In EBS it depends a lot on how Cash Management is set up and on the integrations around it.
A test that doesn't touch the close
You don't need to replace the process to test this. You can take the items left unreconciled and have the agent investigate a copy of those cases, in parallel and without touching EBS.
You can even start without any tool: take the items left unreconciled in the last close, pick ten or twenty and write down what someone had to do to understand each one: who they asked, which system they checked and which document they ended up finding. If the same two or three sources keep showing up, you already know what an agent should investigate first.