E-commerce
July 1, 2026
"Are you reading my messages live?" The bot replies "no" even though a QA sample exists. The customer opens a convqmon_ ticket.
An e-commerce quality review AI chatbot explains purpose, sampling, limited access and anonymization from register #911, without denying the process or confusing it with training (#907).
This guide #912 covers intents bot_convqmon_*, flow CONVQMONbot QMB-1 to QMB-8 and guardrails CONVQMON-REGISTRY-GATE. Bot pair of the CONVQMON playbook (#911). Usecase: quality review transparency on the widget side.
Summary
Why explain the quality review from the bot's perspective?
Surveillance questions arrive mid-chat. Without a registry copy, the bot denies the review or diverts to generic privacy. CONVQMON-REGISTRY-GATE reduces convqmon_ tickets #911.
What the quality review bot resolves tier 1
Clear purpose: service map improvement
Honest sampling: no real-time listening map
Limited access: internal roles map
Anonymization: masking rules map
Distinct training: reroute #907 if there is confusion
DTC retail example
DTC, registry gate widget. convqmon_bot_trust_deflect +38%, convqmon_bot_deny_review 0 in 5 weeks.
CONVQMONbot #912 vs. CONVQMON #911, TRAINDATAbot #908, CONVREC #899, and QA #277
Seven quality transparency contents, seven distinct roles.
Quick Matrix
#912 CONVQMONbot: bot explaining quality review sampling tier 1 access
CONVQMON #911: agents handling convqmon QM-4 tickets
TRAINDATAbot #908: training sources distinct from QA review
CONVREC #899: recording retention distinct from review
CONVOPT #909: opt-out learning distinct from quality sample
AITRAN #860: AI status disclosure distinct from quality review
Pipeline: widget monitoring question → #912 tier 1 → handoff #911 if why_reviewed or DPO.
Which bot_convqmon_* intents should be configured?
Eight quality review intents mapped CONVQMON-MAP #911.
Eight bot_convqmon intents
bot_convqmon_purpose_answer: purpose_copy purpose map
bot_convqmon_sampling_answer: sampling_copy sample map
bot_convqmon_access_answer: access_copy roles map
bot_convqmon_anon_answer: anon_copy anonymisation map
bot_convqmon_surveillance_reassure: no real-time listening
bot_convqmon_vs_training_reroute: handoff TRAINDATAbot #908
bot_convqmon_why_reviewed_handoff: specific case agent #911
bot_convqmon_feed_loop: consume LOG #911 purpose_copy
Each response logs registry_version intent convqmon_* deflect_or_handoff.
How should CONVQMON-MAP #911 be consumed?
The bot reads CONVQMON-MAP #911 + bot fields: purpose_copy, sampling_copy, access_copy, anon_copy, not_realtime_copy, training_distinct_copy, agent_handoff_url, policy_link.
Bot quality review Guardrails
CONVQMON-REGISTRY-GATE: responses only from sync registry
NO-DENY-REVIEW-BOT: do not deny QA if process is documented
NOT-REALTIME-BOT: always specify no live monitoring
TRAINING-REROUTE-BOT: training → #908
RECORDING-REROUTE-BOT: recording → #899
WHY-REVIEWED-HANDOFF-BOT: specific case → agent #911
DPO-HANDOFF-BOT: formal GDPR escalate agent
CONVQMON-FEED-LOOP-BOT: LOG #911 enriches purpose_copy
CONVQMONBOT-SUP policy in six rules
Six transparency rules quality review manager widget side.
CONVQMON-REGISTRY-GATE: tier 1 from register #911 only
NO-DENY-REVIEW-BOT: documented sample honesty
NOT-REALTIME-BOT: reassure perceived monitoring
TRAINING-DISTINCT-BOT: QA review ≠ traindata reroute
WHY-REVIEWED-HANDOFF-BOT: individual case agent #911
CONVQMON-FEED-LOOP-BOT: each LOG #911 review widget within 48 hours
Flow CONVQMONbot QMB-1 to QMB-8
Eight-step flow: incoming question classify registry answer route log handoff.
QMB-1 Ingest: message monitoring quality review sample
QMB-2 Classify: convqmon_* vs traindata #908 vs convrec #899
QMB-3 Registry gate: CONVQMON-REGISTRY-GATE lookup
QMB-4 Tier 1 answer: purpose sampling access anon reassure
QMB-5 Route: training_reroute why_reviewed_handoff dpo
QMB-6 Feed loop: LOG #911 adjust purpose_copy widget
QMB-7 Handoff: specific case → agent #911 context
QMB-8 Log: trust_deflect registry_compliance deny_review
Example TPL-CONVQMONbot-SAMPLING
“We analyze a {{sampling_copy}} to improve the service. No real-time listening. Purpose: {{purpose_copy}}. More details: {{policy_link}}.”
TPL-CONVQMONbot and touchpoint templates
Four short quality review embed templates.
TPL-CONVQMONbot-PURPOSE
[purpose_copy map.] Service improvement, not marketing. REGISTRY-GATE.
TPL-CONVQMONbot-SAMPLING
[sampling_copy map.] [not_realtime_copy map.] NOT-REALTIME-BOT.
TPL-CONVQMONbot-ACCESS
[access_copy map.] [anon_copy map.] Limited access for training.
TPL-CONVQMONbot-TRAINING-DISTINCT
[training_distinct_copy map.] QA review ≠ training. TRAINING-REROUTE if needed.
Touchpoints
"Do you read everything?": surveillance_reassure + sampling
"Why review?": why_reviewed_handoff #911
"Are you training?": vs_training_reroute #908
LOG CONVQMON #911: feed_loop purpose_copy
Edge cases: notification, bot-only chat, opt-out overlap
Five cases out of standard flow.
Client notified review: why_reviewed_handoff agent #911 mandatory
Bot-only conversation: specify bot review + audit #143
Opt-out #909 active: anon_copy exclusions if registered
"Are you an AI?" alone: #860 AITRAN
convqmon_ ticket despite bot: feed_loop review registry gaps
Essential convqmon_bot KPIs
Five CONVQMONbot steering metrics and correlation #911.
convqmon_bot_trust_deflect: reviewed questions resolved without a convqmon_ ticket
convqmon_bot_registry_compliance: % of responses aligned with registry
convqmon_bot_deny_review: QA process denial target 0
convqmon_bot_not_realtime_cited: % monitoring with not_realtime
convqmon_bot_training_misroute: training confusion low target
Target: deny_review at zero and trust_deflect on the rise.
CONVQMONbot anti-patterns
Five common bot quality review mistakes.
Denying the QA review: NO-DENY-REVIEW if process is documented
Forgetting it is not real-time: NOT-REALTIME on surveillance_fear
Improvising the sample: REGISTRY-GATE sampling_copy only
Confusing training: TRAINING-REROUTE #908
Inventing why_reviewed: HANDOFF #911 specific case
CONVQMONbot with Qstomy
Qstomy on Shopify: CONVQMON-MAP sync #911, templates purpose sampling access, why_reviewed handoff, KPI convqmon_bot dashboard.
Scenario: DTC, 5 tickets/month convqmon. Registry gate tier 1. convqmon_bot_trust_deflect +38%, convqmon_ tickets -35% in 5 weeks.
Explore AI support and request a demo.
Checklist, FAQ and going further
CONVQMONbot Checklist (8 steps)
Sync CONVQMON-MAP #911: purpose sampling access anon
Policy CONVQMONBOT-SUP: 6 REGISTRY-GATE NO-DENY rules
8 intents bot_convqmon_*: flow QMB-1 to QMB-8
4 templates TPL-CONVQMONbot-*: PURPOSE SAMPLING ACCESS TRAINING-DISTINCT
policy_link: public quality review page
agent_handoff: route #911 why_reviewed configured
Red team review: deny review test not_realtime
KPI Dashboard: convqmon_bot_* section 9 + delta convqmon_
FAQ
Difference with #911?
#911 = specific DPO case agents. #912 = bot tier 1 purpose sampling access.
Difference with #908?
#908 = training sources. #912 = service quality review.
Difference with #277?
#277 = internal ritual. #912 = customer widget copy.
Deny the review on the bot side?
No if the process is documented. NO-DENY-REVIEW + REGISTRY-GATE.
Going further
This week: sync CONVQMON-MAP #911, purpose sampling templates, why_reviewed handoff, measure convqmon_bot_trust_deflect.
Enzo
July 1, 2026
