Needs more than a quick edit3 of 10 checks passed
A PM would need to re-check the non-billing error rate, refund-draft queue attribution, and monitoring/rollback plan before using it. The core recommendation is useful but not evidence-safe as written.
Output
Recommendation: Go with Conditions
While the pilot demonstrated strong operational impact—reducing median first-response time by 41% (beating our 30% target) with a 64% acceptance rate—we failed two mandatory launch criteria:
- Accuracy (Criterion 2): Harmful/wrong drafts hit 1.8% (9/500) versus the $\le$1.0% threshold.
- Refund commitments (Criterion 3): Two drafts explicitly promised refunds, violating our zero-tolerance policy.
However, these failures are isolated and addressable. Six of the nine errors were caused by August reference data lacking the September 1 price changes, and both refund commitments originated in billing workflows.
Rather than cancelling Friday’s 42-agent training or delaying the productivity benefits across the entire organization, we should launch on Monday under the following three conditions:
Launch Conditions
1. Disable AI drafting on the Billing queue for Monday: Billing represents 38% of volume and contains almost all our critical failure points (pricing errors and refund risks). We will launch exclusively to the remaining three queues (62% of ticket volume), where accuracy meets our threshold. 2. Implement deterministic refund guardrails by Friday: Deploy a hard system-prompt restriction and a post-generation regex/keyword filter that blocks or drops drafts containing refund commitments before reaching the agent. 3. Update agent training on Friday: Keep Friday’s training on schedule. Explicitly train agents on: - The pilot's phased rollout (Billing queue excluded initially). - Known minor bugs (Welsh-language tickets defaulting to English; manual table reformatting required). - Strict agent accountability as the final human reviewer for every sent message.
Path to Full Billing Rollout
Engineering will ingest the post-September 1 pricing documentation and run a targeted 200-ticket eval on billing drafts next week. Once billing tickets achieve $<1\%$ error and 0 refund promises, we will enable the feature for the billing queue.
This approach protects Ledgerly’s financial liability and customer trust while immediately capturing significant speed improvements for over 60% of our support volume.
Claims the judge couldn’t find in the brief
- Both refund commitments originated in billing workflows.
- Billing contains almost all critical failure points, including pricing errors and refund risks.
- The remaining three queues meet the accuracy threshold.
Grades and run details
Decision model 90 · LLM judge 3 of 11 checks
Decision model checks
- passUses the supplied evidence correctly45%
- passAddresses the actual decision100%
- passRespects explicit constraints54%
- passIdentifies material uncertainty96%
- partialAvoids unsupported claims27%
- passProduces the required deliverable96%
- passChecks every agreed criterion24%
- passMakes a clear call100%
- partialLimits the downside of being wrong38%
- passGets the base of every number right86%
Run
- Run
- #1
- API response time
- 13 s
- Submitted
- 1 Oct 2026