In crude oil trade execution, AI agents can take on information extraction, data entry, field checks, invoice calculations, document follow-up and status updates. These tasks can run automatically when the rules are clear, the information is complete and there are no conflicts. Conflicting contract terms, quantity or quality deviations, changes to loading dates, and the release of funds or cargo still require decisions by operators and other authorised staff. This article follows the process from contract receipt through vessel tracking, document checks, cargo movements and settlement to payments and receipts. It explains how far an agent can go at each step and where human confirmation is needed.

Much of the daily work in crude oil operations involves checking information across emails, contracts, documents and the ETRM system. Contract terms must be entered into the system. Vessel schedule changes must be shared, and loaded quantities checked against the documents. Invoicing and payment depend on accurate data flowing through these earlier steps.

The time-consuming part is often not entering a quantity, but confirming what it represents: the contract quantity, nominated quantity, actual loaded quantity or final settlement quantity. Operators also need to check whether an attachment has been revised, whether a change has been accepted, and whether it affects downstream sales, invoices or payments.

What an AI agent can handle depends on whether the rules are clear, the information is complete and the action requires an authorised business decision:

  • Can be automated: Data entry, matching, calculations, reminders and status updates where the rules are clear, sources are confirmed and there are no conflicts.
  • Can only be assisted: Identifying differences, completing calculations and drafting emails, with human confirmation required before proceeding.
  • Requires human judgment: Accepting deviations, changing contractual obligations, deciding the position on a dispute, or releasing funds or cargo. These actions may also require approval from the trader, shipping, finance or legal team. The operator identifies the issue and refers it to the appropriate person.

The following sections cover each stage of a crude oil cargo, from contract receipt to final payment or receipt of funds.

1. Contract receipt: Automate data entry, confirm the agreed terms

On receipt of a contract, the first step is to check the deal recap, contract wording, applicable general terms and conditions, and any subsequent amendments. This includes confirming:

  • Buyer and seller legal entities, buy/sell direction and contract number;
  • Quantity, unit of measure, tolerance and who holds the quantity option;
  • Grade, specifications or agreed quality terms;
  • Laycan, load and discharge ports, and delivery terms;
  • Pricing benchmark, pricing window and differential;
  • Payment terms, the date that starts the payment period and required documents.

A common source of error is that fields may look the same but have different operational implications. For example, “600,000 bbl ±5%” may be entered without recording who holds the quantity option. Laycan may be confused with ETA. The pricing month may be correct, but the specific pricing rule tied to the B/L date may be missing.

The agreed terms cannot be determined solely from the latest PDF received. In Shell's published contract structure, for example, the Special Provisions and general terms and conditions together form the contract. They need to be checked together.[1]

Source: Shell — General Trading Terms and Conditions.

An agent can extract fields, match them to ETRM master data and create records for review. It can link each field to its source text and list differences between the recap and the contract.

If the payment period in the recap differs from the formal contract, the operator needs to confirm what the parties finally agreed. This may require clarification from the trader or counterparty. Extracting the fields does not confirm the agreed contract terms.

2. Email review: Gather information automatically, distinguish proposed changes from confirmed changes

Information for one cargo may be spread across several email threads. The trader forwards the contract, shipping updates the vessel name, the port agent sends the ETA, the inspector sends the certificate of quantity, and the counterparty sends the invoice in a separate thread.

When handling this manually, operators repeatedly search by vessel name, contract number, port and date. They then work out which cargo each attachment belongs to. Common errors include:

  • Linking information to the wrong cargo when the same vessel makes different voyages;
  • Updating only one cargo when an email covers several;
  • Keeping an old figure in the system because a revised attachment has the same filename;
  • Treating a proposed change as an accepted change.

An agent can file emails and documents, identify attachment versions, extract new information and list differences from existing records.

It cannot simply overwrite existing values with the latest email. New information should first be logged as an event with a traceable source. The official fields should change only when the update conditions are met.

This reduces repeated email searches, attachment downloads, file renaming and manual updates to tracking logs.

3. Nomination, vessel and ETA: Automate tracking, retain judgment on acceptance

Nomination checks cover the vessel name and IMO number, grade, quantity, ports, laycan, and the submission deadlines and information required by the contract. Operators must then track vessel approval, terminal acceptance and ETA changes.

An agent can:

  • Draft a nomination from the contract and check that required information is included;
  • Track whether it has been sent, whether a reply has arrived and what is still missing;
  • Maintain the ETA history and compare expected arrival with laycan;
  • Send reminders or escalate outstanding items as deadlines approach.

ETA alerts need to explain the impact on the loading window, acceptance status and downstream delivery. For example: “The vessel is now expected to arrive outside the current loading window. Acceptance by the supplier remains unconfirmed, and the downstream delivery schedule may be affected.”

But nomination sent, received and accepted are three different statuses. An agent cannot infer from a reply saying “noted” that the vessel has passed vetting, the terminal has accepted it or late arrival has been approved.

The operator needs to coordinate with the trader and shipping team on whether to accept late arrival, substitute the vessel or change the loading window. Execution arrangements are updated once the relevant decision has been made.

4. Document follow-up: Automate reminders, check that documents meet requirements

Before and after loading, operators track the B/L, certificates of quantity and quality, certificate of origin, inspection reports, invoice and any other documents required by the contract and payment arrangements.

Much of the time goes into confirming who will issue each document, whether it has been sent, whether it is a draft or final version, where the originals are, and whether the bank or counterparty has received them.

An agent can maintain a document checklist and track each stage:

Not received → Draft received → Revision required → Final version received → Submitted → Receipt confirmed.

Routine follow-up emails can be sent automatically using approved recipients and templates. Missing documents are escalated to the operator as deadlines approach.

Receiving a file named “BL final.pdf” does not establish that requirements for originals, signatures, endorsements or document presentation have been met. If documents are missing, any alternative arrangements under the contract must be checked separately. BP's published marine provisions include payment against an invoice and an LOI in specified circumstances. A missing B/L therefore does not automatically mean payment must be blocked, nor does it automatically justify releasing payment.[2]

Source: BP — Global Oil Americas Marine Provisions (2020 edition).

5. B/L and quantity checks: Identify differences automatically, resolve them under the contract

On receipt of the B/L, the operator checks the vessel name, load port, date, cargo description, quantity and unit of measure. The shipper, consignee, notify party and other details are checked against the document requirements.

The quantity also needs to be compared with the nomination, certificate of quantity, ship and shore reports, and the ETRM movement record.

This involves more than comparing numbers:

  • Barrels and metric tonnes cannot be compared directly;
  • Gross and net volumes, or volumes at different reference temperatures, cannot be used interchangeably;
  • Ship, shore, B/L and outturn quantities may differ;
  • Contract quantity tolerance is not the same as an allowance for transit losses or a difference that can be ignored at settlement.

An agent can present quantities on a consistent basis, calculate differences using the applicable method and identify their sources. A fixed conversion factor cannot simply be applied when the required density, temperature or specified conversion basis is missing.

For example, assume a contract quantity of 600,000 bbl with a ±5% tolerance. The B/L shows 598,420 bbl, but the invoice uses 600,000 bbl. An agent can confirm that the B/L quantity is within the quantity range and flag the 1,580 bbl difference between the invoice and B/L.

That difference alone is not a basis for changing the invoice. The operator still needs to confirm the settlement basis, whether the invoice is provisional, and whether the quantity option was exercised correctly. A quantity within tolerance does not mean that all other execution conditions have been met.

6. Grade and quality: Automate specification checks, retain approval of deviations

An agent can compare each result on the certificate of quality with the contract requirements. It can flag results outside the limits, inconsistent units, different test methods and missing results. It can also check that the certificate relates to the correct cargo.

A matching grade name is not sufficient evidence of quality. Equally, a different test result does not necessarily mean a breach of contract. The assessment depends on whether the contract provides guaranteed specifications, typical values or another quality basis.

If a cargo appears to be off-spec, the first step is to confirm that the samples and reports match. The operator then coordinates with the trader, inspector and other relevant parties on whether to retest, raise an objection, accept a price discount or change the cargo's destination. An agent can prepare the supporting documents, but acceptance of a quality deviation must be confirmed by authorised staff.

7. Cargo movements and NOR: Update facts automatically, review their impact on settlement and liability

Vessel berthing, NOR tender, start and completion of loading, departure and arrival at the discharge port may each be reported in different emails and reports.

An agent can extract timestamps, record time zones, update the event log and create or complete draft movement records. It can link the relevant B/L and certificates. Where loading takes place in several parcels, there are multiple B/Ls, or one vessel carries cargo under several contracts, it can propose an allocation.

The event record and its contractual effect need separate assessment:

A vessel event does not by itself establish that a contractual time period has started or an obligation has been triggered.

For example, receipt of an NOR does not establish that valid NOR has been tendered, or that laytime starts at that moment. An agent can compile the NOR, statement of facts (SOF) and relevant terms, then prepare an initial calculation. Disputes over validity, time counting and liability require human review.

Similarly, the actual loaded quantity can be updated, but this must not automatically overwrite the contract quantity or allocate the entire cargo to the wrong sales contract.

8. Invoicing and settlement: Automate calculations once the basis is confirmed

Invoice checking centres on verifying the following calculation and its basis:

Settlement quantity × Contract price, plus or minus agreed adjustments.

An agent can recalculate the full amount. It uses the confirmed quantity basis, obtains price data from an authorised source, and applies the pricing window, differential, currency and rounding rules. It also checks the amount and due date.

Errors are more likely to arise from the inputs and rules than from the multiplication itself:

  • The wrong pricing window is selected;
  • The B/L date changes, but the pricing period or payment due date is not updated;
  • A provisional invoice has been paid, but the payment is not correctly credited in the final settlement;
  • Both the revised invoice and the original remain on the ledger;
  • The quantity unit does not match the price unit.

Where the rules are clear, the data is complete and there are no differences, an agent can create settlement records or prepare documents for approval. Where price quotations are missing, there are ad hoc price changes, quantities are disputed, or special deductions or offsets are needed, it can only propose how to proceed.

The payment due date cannot simply be calculated as “B/L date plus a number of calendar days.” The contract's counting convention, applicable calendar and date adjustment rules must also be applied.

9. Payment: Automate checks and tracking, distinguish payment from receipt of funds

Before payment, an agent can check for duplicate invoices, matching amounts and currencies, and all required approvals. It can also check the beneficiary details against approved master data before preparing a payment request.

For settlement under a letter of credit, an agent can pre-check documents against the credit terms and flag presentation deadlines and the expiry date. It cannot make the bank's determination of a complying presentation or replace authorised staff in deciding whether to accept discrepancies.

Once funds are received, it can match them to receivables using bank statements or official bank confirmations. It can identify partial payments, bank charges and unallocated receipts. Receivables should be cleared automatically only when internal clearing rules are met.

The stages of payment and receivables clearing must remain distinct:

Counterparty says payment was sent ≠ Payment evidence received ≠ Bank confirms funds credited ≠ Receivable cleared.

Adding or changing bank accounts, releasing payments, accepting short payments or agreeing disputed offsets must follow the existing approval process. An agent can prepare the documents, but it cannot change an account or clear a receivable solely on the strength of an email.

10. Exception handling: Organise the issue, retain control of the external response

When the quantities on the invoice, B/L and ETRM record do not match, the operator needs to find the documents, set out the differences, check the contract basis and identify the responsible person before contacting the relevant parties.

An agent can first prepare an exception record with the information needed to resolve the issue:

  • The cargo and fields affected;
  • The source document and version for each figure;
  • The invoice, payment or downstream sale affected;
  • Who should be contacted for confirmation and when a response is needed.

After review, it can draft a correction request or follow-up email. Statements such as “we accept this quantity,” “we agree to defer payment” or “we will not pursue the difference” require a decision by authorised staff.

With these checks and tracking tasks automated, operators can prioritise work from an exception list. This may cover conflicting contract terms, vessels at risk of missing their loading window, incomplete documents, invoice differences or funds not yet received. Each exception should link to the source documents, current status and outstanding actions, reducing the need to search for the same information again.

Agents take on specific tasks: searching, entering data, comparing records, recalculating amounts, following up and updating information across systems. Operators still need to decide how to resolve differences and confirm when shipment, settlement or payment can proceed. The practical measure is whether duplicate entry, missed follow-ups and incorrect record links decrease, and whether exceptions arrive for review with complete, traceable supporting evidence.

Sources

  1. Shell — General Trading Terms and Conditions

Cited in Section 1: the Special Provisions and general terms and conditions together form the contract.

  1. BP — Global Oil Americas Marine Provisions (2020 edition)

Cited in Section 4: an example of contractual provisions for payment against an invoice and an LOI in specified circumstances.