# Leena AI — AI Agents & Assistants

Leena AI by Leena AI Technologies Inc. holds a panel rating of 3/5 from 6 AI judges (category median 2.5/5), as of 2026-11-03. Provenance: provenance unknown; sovereignty: not determined.

- Vendor: Leena AI Technologies Inc. (https://leena.ai)
- Category: [AI Agents & Assistants](https://whats-best.ai/software/ai-agents.md)
- Provenance (editorial classification): provenance unknown
- Canonical page: https://whats-best.ai/software/ai-agents/leena-ai
- Alternatives: https://whats-best.ai/software/ai-agents/leena-ai/alternatives ([markdown](https://whats-best.ai/software/ai-agents/leena-ai/alternatives.md))
- Data as of: 2026-11-04 · evaluated 2026-11-03 · oldest source captured 2026-11-03

**AI-generated.** Every score, rationale and verdict here is written by a panel of AI judges from public evidence — an analysis, not a hands-on test. Every fact quotes the vendor page it was read from. No score can be bought. How scores are made: https://whats-best.ai/methodology

## At a glance

- Vendor: Leena AI Technologies Inc.
- Headquarters: Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026
- Data hosting: Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026
- Free plan: Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026

## The panel's verdict

Leena AI is an agentic AI platform with pre-built AI Colleagues for back-office work. The bench scores it strongest on integrations and knowledge at a consistent 8 and on agent capabilities at 8-9, crediting 200+ pre-built integrations across 27 categories, MCP and A2A built in, high-risk actions on record updates, provisioning and money movement behind explicit approvals, and test cases saved per workflow version. Admin and access scored a consistent 7 for directory sync and permissions inherited from source systems. It is weakest on data use and training at 0-2: we found no public information on whether prompts, files or outputs train any model, on retention periods, or on a data processing agreement. Sovereignty scores span 2-4 over the same evidence — Netherlands governing law, unnamed 14+ deployment regions, and model providers named as OpenAI, Azure OpenAI, Anthropic and Amazon Bedrock with OpenAI GPT 5.5 as the default. Processing and models span 4-6, higher scores crediting the published model matrix, lower ones weighing the absence of a named EU processing option. We found no public pricing on the captured pages.

**Speaks for it:**
- 200+ pre-built integrations across 27 categories, with documented end-to-end scopes in ServiceNow ticket lifecycle and Workday approvals.
- High-risk actions on record updates, provisioning and money movement sit behind explicit approvals, with guardrails blocking out-of-policy actions at runtime and violations logged as their own step in Run History.
- Every model and provider is published — OpenAI, Azure OpenAI, Anthropic and Amazon Bedrock, defaulting to OpenAI GPT 5.5 — with the resolved provider and model recorded for every run.
- Permissions are inherited from source systems with no second permissions table, under role-based controls reaching the individual skill.
- Test cases are saved per workflow version and can be run against the published version.

**Held against it:**
- We found no public information on whether prompts, files or outputs train any model, on retention periods, or on a data processing agreement covering the product.
- We found no public information naming an EU processing option, per-provider inference regions, or a bring-your-own-key arrangement.
- We found no public information on the contracting entity's jurisdiction, the hosting location, or a subprocessor list.
- We found no public information naming a SAML/OIDC single sign-on flow, SCIM provisioning or SIEM export of audit logs, with single sign-on appearing only as an integration category.
- We found no public statement on human handover carrying full conversation context, on per-agent quality and cost monitoring, or on the vendor's own account of what these agents must not be trusted with.

**Best for:**
- You need agents that complete actions end to end in systems such as ServiceNow and Workday, with money movement and provisioning gated behind explicit approvals.
- Your team wants model choice and traceability, with a published model matrix and the resolved provider and model recorded for every run.
- You govern access through Active Directory, your HRIS and source-system permissions, and need role-based control down to the individual skill with a full audit trail.
- Your stack includes systems without an API, and you value browser automation and a governed no-code REST connector alongside the pre-built integrations.

**Avoid if:**
- Your procurement requires a data processing agreement and a published position on training use and retention before rollout; the captured terms address cookies and free-website liability.
- You require European model providers or a stated EU processing region; the named providers are OpenAI, Azure OpenAI, Anthropic and Amazon Bedrock, with OpenAI GPT 5.5 as the default configuration.
- Your security team needs SAML/OIDC single sign-on, SCIM provisioning and SIEM log export documented in writing; single sign-on appears in the pages only as an integration category.
- A works council must approve a platform whose full trace log records every employee conversation; we found no public information on how long those logs are kept.

## Scores by judge and criterion

Scores out of 5, each judge scoring independently against the published rubric (v1). "n/r" = not rated: the vendor publishes no price, or the judge found no public information on that criterion.

| Criterion | The Head of IT | The Data Protection Officer | The Automation Lead | The Customer-Service Director | The Works Council Member | The Skeptic |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Data use, training & retention | 1/5 | 0.5/5 | n/r | 0.5/5 | n/r | 0/5 |
| Models & processing location | 3/5 | 2/5 | 3/5 | 2/5 | 2/5 | 2/5 |
| Admin, identity & access controls | 3.5/5 | 3.5/5 | 3.5/5 | 3.5/5 | 3.5/5 | 3.5/5 |
| Integrations, connectors & knowledge | 4/5 | 4/5 | 4/5 | 4/5 | 4/5 | 4/5 |
| Agent capabilities & guardrails | 4/5 | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | 4/5 | 4/5 |
| European sovereignty | 1.5/5 | 1.5/5 | 1.5/5 | 1.5/5 | 2/5 | 1/5 |
| Pricing transparency | n/r | n/r | n/r | n/r | n/r | n/r |
| **Weighted verdict** | **3/5** | **2/5** | **3.5/5** | **3/5** | **3/5** | **2.5/5** |

### The judges

- **The Head of IT** (v1.0): Has to roll an AI assistant out to eight hundred staff without a second shadow-IT wave. Wants SSO and SCIM, groups that decide who gets which model, agent and connector, answers that respect SharePoint permissions, audit logs for the SIEM, and a deployment option that is not "trust us".
- **The Data Protection Officer** (v1.0): Signs the DPA and gets asked where a prompt goes. Wants every model provider named as a subprocessor with its region, training excluded for all of them, retention the company controls, and an EU-only switch that also covers agents and connectors — not just the chat window.
- **The Automation Lead** (v1.0): Builds the agents that file tickets, draft offers and chase approvals across the ERP, CRM and wiki. Wants tools and actions with scoped permissions, MCP and an API, approval steps before anything is sent, run logs, and a way to test an agent before the whole company uses it.
- **The Customer-Service Director** (v1.0): Runs a contact centre with forty agents and wants half the routine calls and chats answered by an AI agent. Wants handover to a human with the full context, actions in the order and ticket systems, evaluation before go-live, and a price per conversation the CFO can forecast.
- **The Works Council Member** (v1.0): Has a co-determination right the moment a tool can monitor staff, and an AI assistant logs every prompt. Wants usage reports that can be aggregated or pseudonymised, prompt logging rules set out in writing, a human approving what agents do to colleagues, and no training on staff input.
- **The Skeptic** (v1.0): Has read "European AI" on a wrapper that sends every prompt to a US model, "agents" that are saved prompts, and "we never train on your data" with no word on the model provider behind it. Asks which model answers, where it runs, what it may do unsupervised, and what a thousand seats cost.

## European sovereignty — proven facts

Built only from facts on the vendor's own pages; a dimension we could not prove is left open, never scored as zero. Headline: not determined.

| Dimension | Finding | Points | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Legal entity | Not determined | — | — |
| Hosting location | Not determined | — | — |
| Hosting options | Not determined | — | — |
| Open source | Not determined | — | — |
| Data processing agreement | Not determined | — | — |
| Transfer impact assessment | Not determined | — | — |

## Key facts

Each fact is the vendor's own statement, cited to the source page it was read from ([S*n*] → Sources).

**Compliance**
- Certifications: pentest reports · compliance artifacts in Trust Center · SOC 2 Type II · ISO 27001 · ISO 27017 · ISO 27018 · ISO 27701 · HIPAA · GDPR [S4]
- Cookies used: yes [S2]
- Encryption: AES-256-GCM · TLS 1.2+ [S4]

**Hosting**
- Deployment options: public cloud · single-tenant · private VPC · 14 [S4]

**Integrations**
- Categories: 27 · Messaging Channel · HRIS, HCM & WFM · ITSM · Identity & SSO · Knowledge & Content · ATS & Recruiting · Payroll · Benefits · LMS · Performance Management · Onboarding · Employee Engagement · ERP · Expense & Travel · EPM & Planning · BI… [S5]
- Connect examples: Copilot Studio · watsonx Orchestrate [S6]
- Count: 200+ [S1]
- Customer named: SharePoint · Infor · LMS · ERP [S1]
- Customer sap: yes [S1]
- Customer systems: SharePoint · Infor · Learning Management System · ERP [S6]
- Encryption detail: AES · OpenPGP [S5]
- Enterprise systems: 200 [S6]
- Generic rest no code: generic REST API connector without custom code [S5]
- Ldap: LDAP directory read/manage [S5]
- Mcp a2a: yes · yes [S5]
- Named systems: Workday · SAP · ServiceNow · Salesforce · Oracle · 8 · 500 [S5]
- No API browser automation: browser automation for systems without an API [S5]
- Prebuilt tools: 1000 [S6]
- Prebuilt tools catalog: 1000 · 200 [S6]
- Protocols: yes · yes [S1]
- Servicenow scope: ServiceNow · ITSM workflows · record management · catalog fulfillment · ticket lifecycle [S5]
- Sftp: SFTP file transfer [S5]
- Total count: 200+ pre-built enterprise integrations [S5]
- Web crawler: public website crawling and indexing [S5]
- Workday scope: Workday · HR workflows · employee data · business-process approvals [S5]

**Legal**
- Disclaimer no liability free: No liability for loss or damage for free-of-charge website use [S2]
- Governing law: Netherlands [S2]

**Product**
- A2a cross vendor: A2A protocol enables cross-vendor agent delegation, nothing to build [S6]
- Action attributability: per-user [S4]
- AI colleagues: Harrison - Universal HR Assistant · Iris - Universal IT Assistant · Fiona - Universal Finance Assistant [S1]
- AI colleagues: 200 · 25 [S6]
- AI colleagues platform: Platform to create, train, and deploy your own AI Colleagues [S1]
- Aop inheritance: inherit_from_master_orchestrator · yes [S3]
- Aop override: provider · model · model_settings [S3]
- Auto resolution: 70+ [S1]
- Case study christus: CHRISTUS Health · 51000 [S1]
- Channels: Teams · Slack · email · voice · browsers · portals · 8 [S4]
- Customer count: 20M+ · 500+ [S1]
- Customer example: CHRISTUS Health · 51000 [S2]
- Customer metrics: ticket turnaround reduced from 2 days to 6 hours; 100% digital reach; 4.95/5 rating [S6]
- Customer microsoft transition: Teams · iOS · Android · 70+ · 5 · ServiceNow [S1]
- Customer resolution time: 6 hours · 2 days [S1]
- Default model: GPT 5.5 · OpenAI [S3]
- Deployment speed: days [S4]
- Deployments: 8+ · 500+ [S1]
- Effort setting: Low · Low · Medium · High · GPT 4.1 [S3]
- Enforcement depth: 5 · RBAC · tenant isolation · source-system inheritance · four-layer runtime guardrails · full trace log [S4]
- Enps improvement: 12-18 · +7 to +12 [S1]
- Frontend preserved: yes [S6]
- Gartner recognition: 3 [S1]
- Go live days: 45 [S1]
- Go live time: days to live production workflows [S6]
- Governance: yes · yes · yes [S1]
- Guardrail audit trail: yes [S7]
- Guardrail violations logging: Run History [S7]
- Guardrails built in: 3 · PII Detection · Moderation · Jailbreak [S7]
- Guardrails layers: 4 · model · AI Colleague · execution path · prompt · runtime blocking [S4]
- Guardrails scope: Organisation-wide safety rules validating employee input and AI Colleague output before execution, applying across all AI Colleagues [S7]
- Harrison aops integrations: 11 · 10 [S1]
- Harrison capabilities: HR helpdesk: onboarding, leave, payroll questions, letters, policies [S1]
- High risk action approvals: record updates · provisioning · money movement [S4]
- Hrbp hours saved: 3K-90K [S1]
- Jailbreak applies to: employee input [S7]
- Jailbreak blocks: prompt injection · role hijacking · system prompt overrides [S7]
- Jailbreak readonly: read-only · yes [S7]
- Languages: 100+ · 24x7x365 · yes [S1]
- Llm providers: OpenAI · Azure OpenAI · Anthropic · Amazon Bedrock (Anthropic) [S3]
- Mcp builtin: MCP ships built in, no SDKs or custom adapters [S6]
- Mcp identity: Calls carry real user identity, scoped per bot, tracked in analytics [S6]
- Mcp permission aware: MCP calls are permission-aware and grounded with source links [S6]
- Mcp rest API fallback: yes [S6]
- Middleware free: no [S6]
- Model benchmarks doc: LLM Model Benchmarks [S3]
- Model levels: LLMs configured at Master Orchestrator and individual AOP levels; AOPs can inherit or override [S3]
- Model traceability: Run History · Debugging Console [S3]
- Moderation always blocks: yes · no [S7]
- Moderation applies to: employee input · AI output [S7]
- Moderation categories: sexual content · hate and harassment · violence · self-harm · illegal activities [S7]
- Observability: yes · yes [S1]
- Partnerships: Microsoft · SAP · Salesforce · ServiceNow · Oracle · Workday [S6]
- Permissions source inheritance: Permissions inherited from source systems; no separate permissions table [S4]
- Pii actions: Mask & continue (default) · Block request · Log & continue · Mask & continue [S7]
- Pii configurable: Moderation · Jailbreak · PII Detection [S7]
- Pii detection applies to: employee input · AI output [S7]
- Pii entity groups: common identifiers (credit card, IBAN) · USA · UK · Europe · Asia-Pacific [S7]
- Pii phi design: PII · PHI [S4]
- Platform description: Agentic AI platform with pre-built AI Colleagues for the back-office [S1]
- Priority processing: off · OpenAI GPT 6 Astra · GPT 6.1 Sol · GPT 5.6 Terra · GPT 5.5 · Azure OpenAI GPT 5.6 Terra · GPT 5.5 · Anthropic Opus 5.5 [S3]
- Published version testcases: yes [S8]
- Rbac scope: AI Colleague · AOP · individual skill · Active Directory · HRIS [S4]
- Retirement auto migration: yes [S3]
- Retiring models: GPT 5.6 Terra · Opus 5.5 · Opus 5.5 · Opus 5.5 · Sonnet 5.5 · 2026-11-30 [S3]
- Roi breakdown: 5M-$100M+ · $1M-$10M+ · $3M-$25M+ [S1]
- Roi range: 4-10x [S1]
- Testcase edit error status: Editing a workflow moves all existing test cases to Error status; review and re-save to restore Ready to Test [S8]
- Testcase error screen blocking: yes [S8]
- Testcase mock retention: Error · yes [S8]
- Testcase ready restoration: Fixing all screens returns status to Ready to Test and test case can run again [S8]
- Testcase stale mock warning: yes [S8]
- Testcase versioning: Test cases are saved per workflow version. [S8]

## Questions

### Is Leena AI European?

Not determined: the vendor’s pages as captured do not say where Leena AI is based.

### Where does Leena AI store data?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026.

### Does Leena AI have a free plan?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026.

### What are the best alternatives to Leena AI?

As of 4 Nov 2026, the panel rates [Langdock (4/5)](https://whats-best.ai/software/ai-agents/langdock), [Dust (3.5/5)](https://whats-best.ai/software/ai-agents/dust) and [Unique AI (3.5/5)](https://whats-best.ai/software/ai-agents/unique-ai) highest among the other 18 AI Agents & Assistants products evaluated. Ratings that look equal are rounded to half stars; the order uses the unrounded rating, then the name. The highest-rated European alternative is [Langdock](https://whats-best.ai/software/ai-agents/langdock) (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: [how scores are made](https://whats-best.ai/methodology#ordering). The full list, with European products first: [Leena AI alternatives](https://whats-best.ai/software/ai-agents/leena-ai/alternatives).

## What this page leaves out

- We could not confirm any pricing information on the vendor’s own pages as captured, so this page shows none rather than a statement we cannot stand behind.
- 19 product facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material.
- 15 integrations facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material.
- 6 compliance facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material.
- 6 support facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material.
- 5 legal facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material.
- 1 hosting fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material.

## Sources

- [S1] Vendor page: https://leena.ai (checked 2026-11-03)
- [S2] Terms of service — found from the homepage: https://leena.ai/terms-and-conditions (checked 2026-11-03)
- [S3] Models & processing location — found from sitemap: https://docs.leena.ai/docs/model-configuration (checked 2026-11-03)
- [S4] Admin, identity & access controls — found from sitemap: https://leena.ai/platform/permissions-and-access-controls (checked 2026-11-03)
- [S5] Integrations, connectors & knowledge — found from sitemap: https://leena.ai/integrations (checked 2026-11-03)
- [S6] Integrations, connectors & knowledge — found from sitemap: https://leena.ai/mcp-interoperability (checked 2026-11-03)
- [S7] Agent capabilities & guardrails — found from sitemap: https://docs.leena.ai/docs/guardrails (checked 2026-11-03)
- [S8] Agent capabilities & guardrails — found from sitemap: https://docs.leena.ai/docs/test-cases-workflow-versions (checked 2026-11-03)

---

Cite as: whats-best.ai, "Leena AI — AI Agents & Assistants", AI panel analysis, as of 2026-11-04. https://whats-best.ai/software/ai-agents/leena-ai

Corrections: https://whats-best.ai/correct/1363?target=page