How does reviewing a sample change the scope of a freight claims pilot?

A freight forwarder's agent team wants to test an agent that processes damage claims. Claim FCL-3377 is a $14,000 goods damage claim. Claims officers can approve up to $5,000, operations managers up to $20,000, and the regional director above that.

The team asks for a small sample: forty requests, an authority table and a delegation table. They load it into their harness and ask two claims officers to read ten cases each.

The officers agree the amount bands look right. They then point out that the sample has only permanent delegations. In their process, a manager on leave often hands approval to a named peer for a few days, sometimes mid-queue, and open items carry over to the peer.

The team changes the pilot request. They add temporary delegations with start and end timestamps, pending items that cross a delegation boundary, and a rule that a delegate cannot approve items they raised. They also ask for the answer keys to be separated from the inputs.

The revised sample is generated before any larger request is made. The team now has a scope that matches the decisions their agent will actually face.

**What it teaches**

- Put domain reviewers in front of the sample early, since they spot missing behaviour faster than a schema check. - Describe temporary and mid-queue changes explicitly in the request. - Treat the first sample as a way to refine scope, not as the final product.