Skip to content
MirrorFirm

What does a shortcut in a task pack look like, and how would we find it?

An evaluation lead finds an agent scoring well on utility connection requests by reading the submission channel, not the case, and fixes it with a rebalanced pack.

An evaluation lead is testing an agent on utility connection requests. Each case, such as CASE-1180, must be routed to one of five queues: `residential-standard`, `residential-network-extension`, `commercial-small`, `commercial-large` and `engineering-review`.

The agent routes nearly every case correctly. The lead is suspicious because its event logs show few policy checks. She runs an ablation: the same tasks with `submitted_via` removed, then with `raw_text` removed.

Without `submitted_via`, performance drops sharply. In the generated sample, requests from the installer portal were almost always `commercial-small`, and web-form requests were almost always `residential-standard`. The channel predicted the queue, so the agent did not need to read the address, load or supply type.

The lead asks for a revised sample in which channel is independent of queue, and adds cases where an installer-portal request is residential and a web-form request is commercial. She also requests answer keys that list the required checks, so a correct route reached without the connection-load check is scored as a process failure.

**What it teaches**

- Strong outcome results with thin process traces deserve scrutiny. - Run ablations on incidental fields such as channel, sender and formatting. - Ask for distributions of fields against labels as part of sample review. - Answer keys that record required checks catch right answers reached for the wrong reasons.

Ablation runs on a sample can reveal when routing labels are predictable from incidental fields, before you trust any headline result.

Audience:
Evaluation teams
Content type:
Scenario
Buyer question:
How to evaluate it

Content release: r-a220eb6e099b243b

More on Application intake