Chirath Soithong GitHub Résumé PDF

Project 01Agoda, BangkokCommercial Operations and AI Automation InternJun–Aug 2026

Possible sales opportunities, flagged automatically, approved by a person.

BeforeThe team ran its sales checks by hand.AfterThe checks run on their own. A person approves each opportunity.

ResultLiveBuilt to take three kinds of routine work off the team.

Jump to the resultSee the demoTechnical deep dive

The Wireless House at One Bangkok: a restored green-and-white heritage house on raised posts, reached by a wooden walkway through a lawn garden, framed by the complex's glass and stone buildings under a blue evening sky
The Wireless House garden at One Bangkok. Agoda’s office is in Tower 5 of the same complex.

The 60-second version

What I did
Mapped the process with my manager, turned the team’s market and invoicing rules into automatic checks, and built a review step where she ticks the opportunities worth pursuing before an editable draft note is prepared for the account manager.
  1. Find the gap
  2. Apply the rules
  3. Review
  4. Write the note
The first two steps run on their own; a person reviews.
Who did what
I designed and built the tool, with AI coding assistants. The commercial ideas and the final calls were my manager’s.
Runs as
Fixed checks and message templates: the same input always gives the same output, as the guidance I was given asked.

Part 1 of 5: The problem

My manager wanted the checks to run on their own, with the results shown for review.

One check looked for hotels and suppliers selling on Agoda but not yet switched on with partner platforms such as Booking.com and Priceline.

Exhibit 1One sales check, by hand and on its own

Drag to compare

Illustrative picture. Each row is a hotel or supplier selling on Agoda. Before: the team checked by hand whether each one was also switched on at a partner platform. Now: the checks run on their own. Most rows are switched on at a partner platform. Three are not yet: a possible gap. One of them is greyed out by the market and invoicing rules, because that gap is there on purpose. A person ticks the two that remain.

Illustrative Each row stands for a hotel or supplier; the names are examples.
What each mark in Exhibit 1 meansKey · under 1 min

?Checked by handSwitched onPossible gap: on Agoda, not yet on a partner platformThere on purpose: filtered out by the rulesTicked by a person

Part 2 of 5: What I built

I mapped the process, then built the team’s rules into the checks.

The team’s rules, built into the checksNot every gap is an opportunity.The checks apply the team’s market and invoicing rules first, so only the gaps that pass reach review.

Exhibit 2The process I mapped with my manager

Scroll to send six rows through it

Illustrative picture of the four steps, with six example rows. Step 1, find the gap, runs on its own: six hotels or suppliers are flagged as a possible gap. Step 2, apply the rules, runs on its own: two gaps are there on purpose and are filtered out, four pass. Step 3, review: a person ticks three of the four. Step 4: each ticked row becomes an editable draft note for the account manager.

  1. 1
    Find the gapAutomatic
  2. 2
    Apply the rulesAutomatic
  3. 3
    ReviewA person decides
  4. 4
    Write the notePrewritten draft, editable
Illustrative Six example rows; the counts are an example.
Try it: sort four possible gaps by the team’s rulesInteractive · under 1 min

Exhibit 2.1Which possible gaps reach review?

Scroll, or drag the cards yourself

Reaches review

  • Possible gapPasses both rules
  • Possible gapPasses both rules

There on purpose: filtered out

  • Possible gapA market rule applies
  • Possible gapAn invoicing rule applies

Illustrative Each card stands for a possible gap.

Part 3 of 5: Who it was for

It was built for my manager and the account managers.

My manager, the business owner, reviews the results. For each opportunity she approves, a draft note is prepared for the account manager.

What I didAsked account managers what a useful note must say and what they should do next.

Exhibit 3From a tick to a draft note

  1. The checks
    Possible opportunities are ready for review.
  2. My manager
    Ticks the ones worth pursuing, then Next.
  3. Draft note · editable · for the account manager
    Hi [account manager], [supplier] sells on Agoda but is not yet switched on with [partner platform]. Could you talk to them about switching it on?
  4. My manager
    Edits the wording, then Done. The draft is saved.
Illustrative demo The draft is a prewritten template; the words in brackets fill themselves in.
The review screen I built, part by part2 exhibits · about 1 min

What a person still decides

  • Which flagged opportunities to pursue. The checks only flag possible opportunities; she ticks the ones worth pursuing.
  • What the draft note says. It can be edited before it is saved.

Exhibit 3.1Who does what

The checks Run on their own and flag the possible gaps.
My manager Reviews the results and ticks the opportunities worth pursuing.
The account manager An editable draft note is prepared for them.
Green marks the step where a person decides.

Exhibit 3.2The review step I built

Point at a number
Possible opportunities, for review
  1. Possible gapGap
  2. Possible gapGap
  3. Possible gapGap
  4. Possible gapGap
Next: draft note →

Draft note

Editable · for the account manager

EditDone · save
  1. The list. The possible opportunities the checks flagged, ready for review.
  2. Possible gap. The check compares the list with what is switched on at each partner platform.
  3. A person ticks. My manager ticks the ones worth pursuing. Nothing moves on without a person.
  4. Next. For each opportunity she ticks, a draft note is prepared for the account manager.
  5. Draft note. A prewritten draft fills itself in. The reviewer can edit it before it is saved.
Illustrative Rows stand for hotels and suppliers.

Part 4 of 5: How I checked it

My manager and I reviewed the results at least twice a week.

I showed her working versions early, logged the issues we found, and changed course when she said so.

Exhibit 4What the reviews caught, and what I changed

Caught in reviewWhat I changed
Wrong tagsRevised the checks
Hotels already switched onRevised the checks
Tables too dense to read in SlackChanged the layout
Each round: I logged each finding, revised the checks and re-ran them.
The review loop, step by step1 exhibit · under 1 min
  1. Show. I showed her working versions early.
  2. Check. Are the flagged hotels and suppliers real candidates? Is the table easy to work with?
  3. Log. I logged the issues we found.
  4. Change. I revised the checks or the layout, then ran them again.

Exhibit 4.1One round of review, again and again

Point at a step
Show a working version
She checks the results
Log the issues we found
Change course, run it again

Part 5 of 5: What happened

Live

Built to take three kinds of routine work off the team. The judgement stays with a person, on purpose.

I handed it over with a week spent teaching my manager how it works.

SkillsProcess mapping · Business rules · Stakeholder reviews

Exhibit 5What it takes off the team

Scroll to cross out the old way

  1. Repetition

    Before: The same comparison, by hand, row after row.

    Now: It runs the same way every time.

  2. False leads

    Before: Chase a gap, then learn it wasn’t allowed anyway.

    Now: The market and invoicing rules run first, so gaps that fail them are filtered out before review.

  3. Copy-paste

    Before: Write each message by hand.

    Now: A prewritten draft fills itself in.

Built with

  • SQL, fixed checks
  • Python, processing
  • Slack, review and drafts
  • Claude, Codex, Cursor, AI coding assistants