Greenhouse only knows its half.
Greenhouse tracks project management, but can't see balance capacity. So what you read there is already partial.
Match resources to projects shouldn't take a morning of tab-switching across Linear + Ashby + Greenhouse. Optimal allocation improves project success rates.
Today they don't, so the status review guesses.
Greenhouse tracks project management, but can't see balance capacity. So what you read there is already partial.
Balance capacity from Linear sits in its own tab while Greenhouse carries project management. Nobody joins them.
Track assignments surfaces in Ashby ahead of time, but that tab is closed during resource allocation.
Under The Hood
Project Management
HRIS

Skills Databases
Resource Allocation's rundown: Match resources to projects, balance capacity, track assignments, optimize skills, recommend hiring. Sorted by what needs you first.
The Context Store
Airbyte folds Linear + Ashby + Greenhouse and 3 more into the Context Store: project Management, HRIS, Skills Databases, Financial Systems land in one schema, joined on a shared task key, so resource allocation never touches a raw your applicant tracker endpoint.
Your agent queries one surface instead of three APIs. Faster responses, lower cost per query, and results that work because the relationships were built before you asked the question.
The Prompt
Two steps. Your data, your results, under 60 seconds.
Help me turn Greenhouse, Linear, and Ashby into a single status review I can act on.
SETUP
You have the Airbyte MCP layer, wiring up 6+ tools you can query in plain language.
WORKFLOW
connect Greenhouse, Linear, and Ashby -> read project Management, HRIS, Skills Databases, Financial Systems -> merge into one task view -> rank and explain. Each unconnected source is a one-off connect step away.
TASK
Match resources to projects, balance capacity, track assignments, optimize skills, recommend hiring and surface the rundown: highest-risk tasks first, each with a recommended next step.The Outcome
10x
10x. 3 hours to match resources to projects becomes one run of resource allocation.
90%
90% off the build cost: 6 sources already licensed, nothing extra to match resources to projects.
3 -> 1
3 sources, 1 prompt: Greenhouse, Linear, and Ashby reconciled before resource allocation runs.
Based on internal benchmarks comparing Context Store queries to sequential API calls across equivalent datasets.
01 · Output
Resource Allocation ranks each task by risk, not by name. The top of the list is where to start.
02 · Signal
Any conflict between Greenhouse and Linear on project Management is raised for review rather than silently smoothed over.
03 · Context
Each line carries its evidence. Balance capacity pulled from Linear and Ashby. Right where you read it.
04 · Action
Every row ends in a move: resource allocation tells you what to change and who owns it.
05 · Brief
A rundown you can drop into the status review: ranked, sourced from Greenhouse, Linear, and Ashby, scoped to project Management.
Operations teams run status reviews on stale, scattered data: Shopify, Salesforce, and Stripe each hold a piece, none hold the whole. Order errors damage customer experience.
The data for your status review already exists in Salesforce + Stripe + Shopify. The problem is no one view joins it. Generic experiences convert at 2%.
Track time logged against project budgets shouldn't take a morning of tab-switching across Gmail + Asana + Slack. Project overruns are only discovered at invoicing.
Didn't find your answer? Please don't hesitate to reach out.
Is project Management stored anywhere by Resource Allocation?
What if a task shows up in two of Greenhouse, Linear, and Ashby?
Which clients run resource allocation?
How do I build a resource allocation agent with Greenhouse, Linear, and Ashby?
Connect Greenhouse, Linear, and Ashby (plus 51+ more) and ship resource allocation today to match resources to projects.