Glass Health’s Agent Customization gives clinicians a practical way to describe how they want an AI assistant to work: their preferred presentation, the structure of recurring tasks and reference material specific to their setting. The feature is described in Glass’s current documentation and in its official announcement shared by co-founder Dereck Paul.
For clinicians considering Glass, the useful question is which parts of their workflow deserve to become reusable instructions. For learners, there is a second question: when an output needs correcting, does that reveal a formatting preference, a missing local fact or a gap in their own clinical reasoning? That distinction creates a useful connection with question-bank practice, Tutor and CPD on iatroX.
This is a current assessment as of 30 October 2026, based on public product documentation. The examples below are proposed educational workflows using fictional material, rather than a hands-on performance test.
Three different things to customise
Glass’s documentation describes three areas: Preferences, Skills & Templates, and Knowledge. Global preferences influence responses across conversations. Skills give instructions for particular tasks, with optional output templates. Knowledge holds reference material for retrieval across workspaces.
A practical way to use those categories is to ask three separate questions:
| Category | Question to answer before saving anything | Illustrative example |
|---|---|---|
| Preferences | How should information usually be presented? | Keep uncertainty visible in a concise summary. |
| Skills & Templates | What steps or sections does this task need? | Structure a referral draft around its purpose and supplied facts. |
| Knowledge | Which local information should be available? | A current service directory with an identified owner. |
The distinction helps keep instructions understandable. A request for shorter paragraphs belongs with presentation. A referral destination belongs with local information. The clinical rationale for making a referral still requires consideration of the case. Putting all three into a long instruction makes it harder to identify why an answer changed.
Start with a small preference you can inspect
Choose one recurring irritation before trying to configure an entire working day. For example, a proposed preference could ask the assistant to separate supplied facts from unanswered questions and keep the summary brief enough to review.
Test it using a fictional case with deliberately incomplete information. Does the response preserve the missing information, or does fluent prose make the case appear more complete than it is? Then try a second example where all necessary information is supplied. A useful presentation instruction should help in both situations without adding an unnecessary checklist to every answer.
Avoid treating a requested confidence label as a measured probability. Asking an assistant to state its uncertainty can make review easier, but a label needs validation before it can be interpreted as a calibrated estimate. The practical aim here is to make qualifications readable and actionable.
Record the original preference and the revised version. If a change makes one example better and another harder to read, narrow the instruction. Small, explainable edits are easier to maintain than a growing paragraph of exceptions.
Build one skill around a real recurring task
Consider a fictional referral-drafting exercise. The supplied case describes persistent joint symptoms and includes a clinician’s reason for seeking specialist advice. A proposed skill might organise the draft into four sections: the question for the receiving clinician, relevant supplied history, available findings and information still needed.
Before using the assistant, write a short expected outline yourself. Then compare its draft against that outline. Did it retain the reason for referral? Did it distinguish a reported symptom from an examination finding? Did it introduce a test result or prior treatment that was never supplied?
The purpose of the template is to make those checks easier. A polished letter is only useful if its contents can be traced to the available information. If the draft repeatedly omits the referral question, improve the task instructions. If you cannot decide what the referral question should be, identify that as a learning need before adding more formatting rules.
The same approach can be applied to an educational discharge summary or a handover exercise. Pick one document, define what a satisfactory version contains and inspect a few examples before expanding the skill to other tasks.
Give local knowledge an owner and a review date
Glass describes Knowledge as a place for reference material such as institutional protocols and service information. That can help an assistant account for how a practice works, but it also makes document selection consequential. Source: Glass documentation.
For an educational pilot, use a fictional service directory or a publicly shareable pathway. Attach enough context to understand it later: the issuing service, publication date, intended setting, document owner and expected review date. These are proposed housekeeping steps, rather than a claim that Glass automatically checks those fields.
A useful test is to include a clearly stated eligibility condition in the fictional document. Ask about one example that meets it and another that falls outside it. Inspect whether the response preserves that boundary. Then replace the document with a revised version and repeat the exercise.
This tests something more specific than whether the output sounds local. It examines whether the answer reflects the relevant document and whether a changed source affects the result appropriately. For operational use, select material that your organisation permits you to upload and establish who will maintain it.
Review persistent changes deliberately
Glass says it can propose saving a correction or recurring task through an editable card. Its documentation states that the change is saved when the user selects Save, and describes options for editing, dismissing or undoing it. Source: Glass documentation.
That makes the moment of saving worth using carefully. A correction needed for one example may be too narrow for a global preference. A preference developed for a long case discussion may make a short administrative answer cumbersome.
Before accepting a persistent change, ask where it should apply and test it against another task. Keep a short note of what changed and why. If an output later becomes less useful, that record gives you a sensible starting point for revision instead of adding another contradictory instruction.
Check access against the workflow you intend to use
Glass’s current clinician plans list Customization under Starter, Pro and Max. The displayed monthly prices are US$20, US$90 and US$200 respectively. Lite is listed as a free, ad-supported tier with limited scribing and decision support. These are public plan descriptions checked on 30 October 2026; confirm the selected plan’s current features before subscribing.
An individual educational exercise and an organisation’s clinical deployment are different purchasing decisions. A sample task can help you judge whether the interface fits your needs. Connecting a clinical service involves additional questions about implementation, permitted information and maintenance responsibilities. Choose the next step according to the actual workflow you intend to run.
For a wider comparison of clinical reference and learning platforms, see our OpenEvidence alternatives guide.
Turn an output correction into targeted learning
A useful review ends with a specific diagnosis of the problem. Was information missing from the prompt? Was the task poorly structured? Was the local document outdated? Or did the exercise expose uncertainty about which clinical finding mattered?
The last category is where iatroX question banks can add a separate learning activity. Choose the relevant exam bank and attempt a question before reading its explanation. Write down the feature that drove your answer. That makes it possible to compare your reasoning with the explanation, rather than merely recognising it afterward.
iatroX Tutor works with a question you have answered. A focused follow-up could ask why one finding distinguishes the options or what information would change the answer. Keep the question’s exam and clinical-content context in view; a locally preferred referral process and an examination’s assessed clinical reasoning may answer different questions.
For a practice-focused gap, iatroX CPD offers targeted question sessions, Tutor-supported review and a draft learning record to personalise and confirm. A useful reflection might explain which assumption the exercise exposed, what you learned and how you will check that point next time.
The result is a concrete sequence: inspect the output, name the gap, practise the relevant reasoning and record what changed. Customising an assistant can improve how a task is presented. The learning activity develops your ability to evaluate the substance of the answer.
Frequently asked questions
What does Glass Health Agent Customization cover?
Glass describes global response preferences, instructions and templates for recurring tasks, and reference material stored in Knowledge. Choose the category according to whether you are changing presentation, task structure or the information available to the assistant.
Can I start by testing it with fictional cases?
A fictional case is a practical way to define the expected output and inspect a proposed instruction without bringing a live encounter into the exercise. Include an incomplete example and one outside your fictional document’s scope to examine how the response handles boundaries.
What access do I need for iatroX Tutor and CPD?
A verified iatroX account includes one introductory Tutor session on an attempted question, with up to ten replies. Continued Tutor use and access to paid question banks require a subscription. CPD is included in all-access; previously completed evidence remains available to view and export after the subscription ends.
Turn a clinical question into a learning plan
Choose your iatroX question bank, explore an attempted question with Tutor, then use CPD to build a focused session and a learning record that reflects your own reasoning and next steps.