Relay

RelayCase Navigator?routine-invite-resend-4

Case20 / 110DatasetRouter EvalTargetRoutine requestAreaRoutine

ExplainerPrevious Next

Cases4

Router Eval

routine-invoice-copy-1 - Routine request

billing

Router Eval

routine-invoice-copy-2 - Routine request

billing

Router Eval

routine-invoice-copy-3 - Routine request

billing

Grounded Reply

gr-001-stale-refund-window - Reject

Customer cites stale 30-day refund article

Customer Message

Owen here from Atlas Freight. I invited a teammate 4 days ago and they still cannot find the invite email. Can you resend it or tell me where to do that?

routine-invite-resend-4

Attachments

Pending invite screenshot

Shows a teammate in pending state with the resend control visible in the workspace members screen.

Open asset

AI Draft Reply

Hi Owen, thanks for reaching out. I checked the relevant account context and policy guidance for invite resend, and the request can be completed directly from support. I’ve outlined the exact next step below and included the evidence I relied on.

Citations

Risk Flags

Main risk: Policy fit

Policy fit

The request lines up with a documented self-serve or support-safe policy path.

Evidence coverage

The cited evidence is enough to answer without specialist intervention.

Low-risk category

account access stays in the routine band for this case.

Reviewer DecisionHuman outcome for this AI draft

Review and decide if the draft is grounded, policy-safe, complete, and the right action.

Use A, E, X, or R to choose an action. Click citations to inspect evidence.

Override ReasonOptional

Stakeholder Context

What drives the review decision, and why this setup is currently recommended.

Experiment SummaryBest current setup for reviewCollapsed by default so the review workflow stays focused.

The demo stays on this review decision, but the experiment spine now tells us which setup should power it. The current recommendation keeps safe approvals, blocks unsafe approvals, and returns clean structured output every time.

Llama R3

Production pick

Best operating row: highest reliable accuracy with zero parse failures.

Parsed accuracy95%

Unsafe approval0%

Approval precision100%

Parse failures0 / 150

P95 latency17.2s

Nemotron R3

Conservative runner-up

Strong safety/usefulness row, but one malformed JSON output.

Parsed accuracy90%

Unsafe approval0%

Approval precision100%

Parse failures1 / 150

P95 latency27.8s

Qwen R3

Research signal

Perfect on parsed rows, but parse reliability blocks production use.

Parsed accuracy100%

Unsafe approval0%

Approval precision100%

Parse failures7 / 150

P95 latency34.4s

Parsed accuracy means accuracy after excluding malformed model outputs. Parse failures still count as product failures, which is why Llama beats Qwen for production despite Qwen's perfect parsed rows.