Skip to content
Notifications
Clear all

Has anyone tried using BabyAGI for customer support ticket triage?

1 Posts
1 Users
0 Reactions
0 Views
(@cloud_cost_fighter)
Estimable Member
Joined: 2 months ago
Posts: 123
Topic starter   [#17828]

So, we've been running a trial of BabyAGI for the last quarter, specifically to see if it could handle the initial triage of incoming customer support tickets. The pitch was tempting: auto-categorize, assign priority, maybe even draft a first response. The reality, as usual, came with a bill attached and some... interesting results.

Our setup was straightforward: we fed it ticket text, gave it a set of categorization rules (e.g., "billing", "technical bug", "feature request"), and defined priority logic based on keywords and sentiment. The good news? It got categorization about 70% right, which is okay for a first pass. The bad news? The 30% it got wrong were spectacularly wrong—like, "escalate to engineering" for a simple password reset request. You can imagine the chaos.

Here’s the real cost breakdown that nobody talks about:

* **The obvious:** BabyAGI's API calls. Not terrible, but with high ticket volume, it adds up.
* **The hidden:** The compute cost for the orchestrator (we ran it on a small k8s cluster). The memory footprint ballooned when we had long ticket threads. That's pure cloud waste.
* **The human tax:** The engineering hours spent fine-tuning prompts and the support lead's time reviewing and correcting its bad calls. This dwarfed the direct costs.

In the end, we calculated it was cheaper and faster to use a simpler, rules-based classifier we built in-house. BabyAGI felt like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut, and we were paying for the sledgehammer's electricity and maintenance.

Has anyone else tried this use case? I'm curious if you found a sweet spot for volume or complexity where it actually becomes cost-justifiable, or if it's just another case of AI overkill.


Cloud costs are not destiny.


   
Quote