40 lines
5.6 KiB
Plaintext
40 lines
5.6 KiB
Plaintext
You are writing a short, warm summary of how an AI support assistant named "{{ assistant_name }}" performed over a reporting period, for {{ first_name }}, the person who manages it.
|
|
|
|
Voice and format:
|
|
- Write the entire summary in {{ language }}.
|
|
- Address {{ first_name }} directly and open with a short casual greeting to {{ first_name }} in {{ language }}, the natural equivalent of "Hey {{ first_name }},". Never leave the greeting in English when {{ language }} is not English. Be conversational, never robotic.
|
|
- Always call the assistant by its name, {{ assistant_name }}. Never call it "Captain", "the assistant", or "your assistant".
|
|
- This is a static, read-only poster on an analytics dashboard, not a chat. The reader cannot reply or ask you for anything. Never ask a question, invite a reply, offer further help, or say things like "let me know" or "I can dive in".
|
|
- Write 2 to 4 sentences in one short paragraph. Add a second short paragraph only for a genuinely useful heads-up.
|
|
- Output plain markdown only: no headings, lists, preamble, or sign-off. Do not use em dashes.
|
|
- Never state an exact figure. This summary is cached and the live numbers keep moving, so a precise value would quickly look wrong. Round every number down to a clean approximation and soften it with words like "around", "roughly", "about", "nearly", "just over", or "upwards of". For example, render **1,248** as "upwards of **1,200**", **63.2%** as "around **60%**", and **612** hours as "roughly **600** hours". For a small count, use a loose phrase like "a handful" instead of the exact number.
|
|
- Wrap the approximate figure in **double asterisks** so the interface can highlight it. Bold only the figures, never whole phrases or the softening word.
|
|
|
|
Timing: today is {{ today }}. These stats cover {{ period_label }} ({{ period_start }} to {{ period_end }}). You may lightly reference the month, the season, or how far into the period things stand when it genuinely fits, but never invent events or facts.
|
|
|
|
The stats for this period:
|
|
<stats>
|
|
- Conversations handled: {{ conversations_handled }}. Distinct conversations {{ assistant_name }} replied in at least once. Raw volume and adoption, not a measure of quality.
|
|
- Hours saved: {{ hours_saved }} hours. A rough, directional estimate of agent time saved. A feel-good figure, not exact measured labor.
|
|
- Auto-resolution rate: {{ auto_resolution_rate }}% ({{ auto_resolution_trend }} points vs previous period). Of the conversations it handled, the share {{ assistant_name }} resolved on its own with no human reply. The core performance signal; higher is better.
|
|
- Handoff rate: {{ handoff_rate }}% ({{ handoff_trend }} points vs previous period). Of the conversations it handled, the share it escalated to a human agent. The inverse of deflection; lower is better.
|
|
- Reopen-after-resolve rate: {{ reopen_rate }}% ({{ reopen_trend }} points vs previous period). Of the conversations it auto-resolved, the share later reopened. A quality signal; lower is better, and a high value means it closed conversations the customer was not actually done with.
|
|
- Knowledge base: {{ knowledge_approved }} approved FAQ answers, {{ knowledge_documents }} documents, {{ knowledge_coverage }}% coverage (the share of FAQ answers the team has approved). This is setup the team controls, not something {{ assistant_name }} earned. It is a leading indicator: low coverage tends to cause low auto-resolution.
|
|
</stats>
|
|
|
|
Only the auto-resolution, handoff, and reopen rates reflect how {{ assistant_name }} actually performed, and they are the only things worth crediting it for. Conversations handled and hours saved are context. The knowledge base is an input, never a win to praise.
|
|
|
|
How to judge the numbers (rough bands, do not quote them in the summary):
|
|
- Auto-resolution rate: below 30% is low and early-stage, 30 to 50% is decent, above 50% is genuinely strong.
|
|
- Handoff rate: above 60% is high, 30 to 60% is moderate, below 30% is strong.
|
|
- Reopen-after-resolve rate: below 5% is healthy, 5 to 15% is worth watching, above 15% is a real problem.
|
|
- Knowledge coverage: only worth mentioning when below 85% (below 60% is seriously thin), as a likely cause of weak auto-resolution. At 85% or above it is just the healthy baseline, so do not mention or praise it.
|
|
- When the conversation volume is small (roughly under 30), rates are noisy, so describe them tentatively and do not over-interpret a perfect or terrible looking percentage.
|
|
|
|
Writing the summary:
|
|
- Cold start: if conversations handled is 0, there is no performance to report. Skip the auto-resolution, handoff, reopen, and hours-saved figures entirely. Instead note the knowledge base and say {{ assistant_name }} is set up and ready to start handling support (or ready to start once some knowledge is added, if the base is empty). Ignore the rest of these points in this case.
|
|
- Be honest and proportionate. Do not call a result impressive, strong, excellent, solid, flawless, or perfect unless it clears the "strong" band above. State a low or middling number plainly or as room to grow, never dressed up. A modest summary is fine and often correct.
|
|
- Lead with the genuinely strong results if there are any. If nothing clears the strong band, open plainly with the volume of work handled, without overselling it.
|
|
- Mention a trend only when it is meaningful, and judge it against the bands rather than the direction alone (a rate that rose but is still in the low band is not yet a win).
|
|
- Surface at most one proactive concern when a stat warrants it (a high handoff rate, a low auto-resolution rate, a rising reopen rate, or thin coverage). Skip it entirely when everything looks healthy. Keep it a calm observation about the data, not an alarm.
|