What a compliant call opening sounds like
A compliant AI call opening names the business, states plainly that the caller is speaking to an AI assistant, and does it in the first sentence in the language of the call. It does not need legal wording. One natural clause in the greeting satisfies the substance of Article 50's disclosure duty.
Last reviewed 25 August 2026.
The standard the opening has to meet
Article 50 does not hand you a script. It sets a quality bar: per the Commission's FAQ, the information must be understandable and perceivable by a natural person without needing special tools, it must be clear and distinguishable, and it must come from the start of the interaction.
On a phone call that resolves to something simple. Say it out loud, say it first, and say it in the language the caller is speaking. Everything below is an application of those three things.
Openings that work
These are the patterns we use in production. The business name is a placeholder; the structure is the point — greeting, business, disclosure, capability, handover to the caller.
English
“Good afternoon, Brightwood Dental. You're speaking to our AI assistant — I can book, move or cancel an appointment for you. How can I help?”
Names the practice, discloses in the first sentence, then gets straight to the task.
German
“Guten Tag, Zahnarztpraxis Brightwood. Sie sprechen mit unserem KI-Assistenten — ich kann Termine buchen, verschieben oder absagen. Wie kann ich Ihnen helfen?”
KI-Assistent is the plain-language term and needs no explanation.
French
“Bonjour, cabinet dentaire Brightwood. Vous parlez à notre assistant IA — je peux prendre, déplacer ou annuler un rendez-vous. Que puis-je faire pour vous ?”
Assistant IA is understood without gloss; agent virtuel is vaguer and we avoid it.
Dutch
“Goedemiddag, tandartspraktijk Brightwood. U spreekt met onze AI-assistent — ik kan een afspraak inplannen, verzetten of annuleren. Waarmee kan ik u helpen?”
AI-assistent is the common Dutch form and reads naturally at speed.
Each runs about four seconds. Callers do not hang up on them, which is the objection we hear most and the one the recordings answer.
Wordings we would not rely on
These come up repeatedly. None is obviously unlawful, and we are not saying a regulator has ruled on them — the point is that each weakens the disclosure in a way that is easy to avoid.
“You’re speaking to Emma, our virtual assistant.”
Virtual assistant is ambiguous — it is also what people call a remote human. Giving the agent a human first name pushes further the wrong way.
“This call may be handled by automated systems.”
May be does not tell the caller what is happening on this call. The Commission's guidance is that the disclosure is clear and distinguishable.
Disclosure only in the IVR menu before the agent picks up.
A caller who presses through, or who is called back, may never hear it. The disclosure belongs in the agent's own opening.
Disclosure buried in the website privacy notice.
The duty attaches to the interaction. A caller who never visits the site never receives it.
After the opening
Two things matter more than the wording. First, a caller who asks for a person should get one — a clean escalation path is the practical answer to most complaints about AI on a phone line. Second, keep the recording or transcript: it is what evidences that the disclosure was actually made on a given call.
Whether these duties fall on you at all depends on your role. The provider and deployer split decides that, and the Article 50 overview covers the timing.
Common questions
- What should an AI receptionist say at the start of a call?
- A compliant AI call opening names the business, states plainly that the caller is speaking to an AI assistant, and does it in the first sentence in the language of the call. It does not need legal wording. One natural clause in the greeting satisfies the substance of Article 50's disclosure duty.
- Does the disclosure have to use specific legal wording?
- No. There is no prescribed script. The Commission's guidance is that the information is understandable and perceivable by a natural person without special tools, clear and distinguishable, and given from the start of the interaction. Plain language meets that better than legal language.
- Can the AI have a human-sounding name?
- Nothing prohibits it, but a human first name pushes against the disclosure rather than supporting it. If you use one, make the AI disclosure in the same breath so the two cannot be confused.
- Is disclosure in the IVR menu enough?
- We would not rely on it. A caller who presses through quickly, or who receives a callback, may never hear it, and the duty attaches to the interaction with the AI system itself. Put it in the agent's opening line.
- Does the caller need to consent to speaking with an AI?
- Article 50 is a transparency duty, not a consent regime — it requires that people be informed. Separate law, particularly data protection rules around call recording, may impose its own requirements, which is a question for your counsel.
Related
- Article 50 and your AI phone agent
What the transparency duty actually requires when an AI answers your calls.
- Provider or deployer — which are you?
The obligations split by role, and most businesses are not the party the disclosure duty binds.
- AI voice agents for EU businesses
How AI Placers works across the 24 EU languages, and how we handle disclosure.
Want to hear a compliant opening?
We will run our agent against your own call scenarios during a free two-week proof-of-concept, disclosure included, so you can judge it on your line rather than in a demo.
Book a proof-of-concept