3AIgent Workspace
MR

Supervisor Alerts

·Post-call AI quality findings requiring review

Post-call review: completed recordings are analysed after the interaction. AI findings require supervisor or QA confirmation.

3AIgent Quality AssistantBot · Today, 10:31· ALR-9821

Potential Quality Issue Detected

Post-call review · Customer Care · Queue: Product Support

High
Agent
Sarah Ahmed
Supervisor
Michael Roberts
Customer Case
CAS-104829
Dynamics Case Link
Call Reference
CALL-2026-06-09-88321
Call Duration
08:42
Issue Type
CRM / Knowledge Mismatch
COPC Category
Critical to Customer
AI Confidence
87%
Issue summary

The customer asked whether the warranty would cover a replacement if the fault reappears within 30 days. The agent advised that the customer would need to pay for a new inspection. The approved knowledge article indicates that repeat faults within 30 days should be escalated for warranty review. The Dynamics case was marked as 'Resolved', but no escalation or follow-up action was recorded.

Evidence
Transcript evidence
  • Customer: “So if it happens again this month, will it still be covered?”
  • Agent: “No, you would need to book and pay for another inspection.”
Knowledge-base evidence

“Repeat faults reported within 30 days of a completed repair should be escalated to Warranty Review before charging the customer again.”

Dynamics comparison
CRM status
Resolved
Expected status
Escalated / Pending Warranty Review
Missing action
Warranty review follow-up
Recommended action

Review the call, confirm whether the case should be reopened, and provide coaching on the 30-day repeat fault warranty process.

Scorecard
72/100
3AIgent Quality AssistantBot · Today, 09:54· ALR-9820

Complaint Not Recognised

Post-call review · Customer Care · Queue: Product Support

Medium
Agent
Daniel Green
Supervisor
Michael Roberts
Customer Case
CAS-104803
Dynamics Case Link
Call Reference
CALL-2026-06-09-88307
Call Duration
11:18
Issue Type
Complaint Handling
COPC Category
Critical to Customer
AI Confidence
81%
Issue summary

The customer used explicit complaint language ('I want to make a formal complaint') three times during the call. The agent acknowledged the frustration but did not log a complaint in Dynamics or follow the complaint handling procedure.

Evidence
Transcript evidence
  • Customer: “I want to make a formal complaint about this service.”
  • Agent: “I'm really sorry, I'll do my best to resolve this for you today.”
Knowledge-base evidence

“When a customer explicitly uses the word 'complaint', the agent must log a complaint record in Dynamics and follow the Complaint Handling SOP within the same interaction.”

Dynamics comparison
CRM status
Resolved
Expected status
Complaint Logged / Open
Missing action
Complaint record creation
Recommended action

Reopen the case, log the complaint retroactively, and coach the agent on complaint recognition cues.

Scorecard
78/100
3AIgent Quality AssistantBot · Today, 09:12· ALR-9819

Excessive Hold and Transfer

Post-call review · Customer Care · Queue: Product Support

Low
Agent
Priya Shah
Supervisor
Michael Roberts
Customer Case
CAS-104788
Dynamics Case Link
Call Reference
CALL-2026-06-09-88295
Call Duration
21:04
Issue Type
Handle Time / Experience
COPC Category
Non-Critical
AI Confidence
76%
Issue summary

The customer was placed on hold four times totalling 8 minutes and transferred twice. Knowledge base indicates the query (PIN reset) should be handled in first contact by the receiving agent without transfer.

Evidence
Transcript evidence
  • Agent: “Let me put you on a brief hold while I check.”
  • Agent: “I'm going to transfer you to another team.”
Knowledge-base evidence

“PIN reset requests are owned by the first-contact agent. Transfers should not be initiated for this journey.”

Dynamics comparison
CRM status
Resolved
Expected status
Resolved (first contact)
Missing action
Avoid transfer for PIN reset
Recommended action

Refresh Priya on the PIN reset knowledge article and self-service tools available at the desktop.

Scorecard
84/100