Which scenario is the strongest case for backing an agent action with an external API or External Service rather than with a Flow?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
You’re right to use an external API when the insurer alone holds the adjudication status. For a policy in your org, a Case you create in Salesforce, or visit details you summarize there, keep the work inside Salesforce and avoid an unnecessary network hop.
Full Explanation
Use an external API or External Service when the authoritative data or decision resides outside Salesforce. A pet insurer’s adjudication status exists only in the insurer’s system, so Flow cannot produce the insurer’s verdict; an external call is appropriate to retrieve it. By contrast, a group’s no-show fee policy in a custom setting is org configuration that Flow can read declaratively, and an outbound call would add latency and an availability dependency for data already available in Salesforce. Creating a Case for a billing dispute is core Salesforce record creation and an archetypal Flow-backed action; the dispute does not make the record external, since the Case is created in Salesforce. Summarising the last three visits is not a reason to send patient data to an unmanaged endpoint: Agentforce can generate summaries through prompt template actions inside the platform, under the Einstein Trust Layer’s masking, toxicity scoring, zero retention, and audit trail. Exam caveat: an external action still runs in the Agent User’s context for anything it touches in Salesforce, while named credentials—not the agent—control outbound authentication. Practical check: confirm the insurer is the sole source of the status and verify the named credential and endpoint before enabling the call.