Quality loop

Answers improve through review

Dchat closes the answer-quality gap with feedback, unanswered searches, knowledge revision packets, usage review, and escalation analysis instead of claiming self-learning automation.

Approved knowledge

AI response quality starts with enabled articles, approved policy wording, and source boundaries operators can inspect.

  • Enabled articles
  • Source boundaries
  • Revision history

Feedback and misses

Thumbs-down answers, unresolved intents, top unanswered searches, and stale-knowledge misses become review inputs for the team.

  • AI feedback
  • Unanswered searches
  • Knowledge gaps

Cost and prompt review

Usage review separates model spend, prompt waste, knowledge gaps, and tool-call risk before pricing or ROI claims are made.

  • Usage export
  • Prompt waste
  • Provider cost

Review signals beat unsupported self-learning claims.

CapabilityStatusDetail
Knowledge base articlesAvailableEnabled articles can ground AI context while article snapshots preserve what changed over time.
Article feedbackAvailableVisitor and operator feedback can identify stale, confusing, or missing article coverage.
Top unanswered searchesAvailableUnanswered help-center searches become content-gap signals for future articles and policy fixes.
Knowledge revision packetsAvailableRevision packets support human drafting, rollback review, and procurement-friendly change evidence.
AI response feedbackAvailableFeedback on AI answers helps prioritize prompt, article, and escalation review without claiming verified resolution learning.
Multi-source ingestion parityNot claimedDo not claim broad Drive, Notion, Dropbox, Confluence, YouTube, or past-interaction ingestion until those connectors ship with proof.
Self-learning automationNot claimedDchat should not claim autonomous retraining, automated prompt rollback, or verified outcome learning from review signals alone.

The quality story is deliberately human-reviewed: use signals to improve approved knowledge before expanding automation.