Support Bounced Follow-Up Queue
Check your email delivery results and open cases for missing supporting records.
Customer support handoffs
Find where your approved articles and agent replies disagree.
A downloadable skill for your AI agent.
Conflicting stated instructions.
Source references, missing information, and questions to review stay with the findings.
Open your download and follow the start guide. Use an AI agent that can load skill files and run the included tools.
Approved articles and agent replies. Confirm the case and period you want to check.
Copy the request below into your agent. Add the files and any task details it needs.
Check the findings against the original records. Choose where to save the report and follow up on open questions.
Use the Support Knowledge Article Contradiction Map skill. Review the attached records: approved articles and agent replies. Prepare this result: conflicting stated instructions. Include a source reference for each finding. List missing information and questions that need my review. Ask me to confirm the scope and where to save the report before you start.
It puts records for the same item side by side. It keeps both original values when they differ, so you can check the source.
Approved articles and agent replies.
For this task, keep one review row for each instruction field + article version. Record approved article, agent reply, and contradiction. Keep the source location beside each value.
Extract the user's issue, facts, actions tried, promises, and unresolved questions. Maintain original policy and conversation versions.
Do not repeat a completed step without cause. A handoff needs an accepting owner; a summary does not prove resolution.
A changed value does not show which source is correct. Semantic equivalence and identity aliases need an explicit mapping and review.
This synthetic example shows the included check in use. Your agent uses its findings to complete your task report.
Synthetic example records
| Starting record | approved article: source-A |
|---|---|
| Record to check | approved article: source-B |
A difference needs review
This result comes from the checking tool in your download.
These are synthetic records from the bundled example.
{"id": "e1", "key": "instruction field + article version / SYNTHETIC-001", "value": {"approved article": "source-A"}}{"id": "o1", "key": "instruction field + article version / SYNTHETIC-001", "value": {"approved article": "source-B"}}After purchase, extract the ZIP. Run these commands from the skill folder. Use a new output folder.
python3 scripts/checks.py
python3 scripts/audit.py assets/example.json \
--files-root assets/sample-files --output-dir example-result
Expected exit code: 1. Code 0 means no helper finding. Code 1 means a finding or review item. Code 2 means incomplete or invalid input.
The check uses the records you supply. Review each finding against the original documents.
Ask your agent to save the completed task report in a folder you choose. The report template includes the result, source references, missing information, and next actions.
Tonotes does not receive your work documents through this website. Documents you share with an AI service follow that service's storage settings.
US$11 includes one skill in a ZIP with 18 files. You receive the instructions and tools to run the task with your own records.
Use an agent that supports SKILL.md instructions and Python 3.10 or later with SQLite. Your AI-agent service is separate.
Start with approved articles and agent replies. Confirm the case, period, and source versions before the review.
Use customer or account ID, ticket, channel, action timestamp to keep records distinct. The agent records the original value, an exact quote, and the source location.
Match each item, then compare its supplied values. Run the Python helper on the structured records. Check each finding against its source.
Prepare the task result: conflicting stated instructions. Include missing evidence, unresolved questions, and the next action for each open item.
Eight synthetic cases check the tool locally. Live-agent accuracy on real documents has not been tested.