Human agents receiving escalations from a support resolution agent report that they must re-ask the customer for the order number and for what the agent already attempted. The escalate_to_human tool currently takes a single free-text field, and the raw conversation transcript averages 40 turns and is pasted into the ticket body. Handled-again contacts sit at 22 percent and average handling time on escalated tickets is nine minutes. Which change most effectively addresses the reported symptom?
- AAttach the complete raw transcript along with every tool call payload and tool result to the ticket, so the human reviewer has access to the full history of what the agent saw and did before escalating.
- BRedefine escalate_to_human with a structured input schema whose required fields are the customer identifier, the order identifier, the issue category, the steps already taken with their outcomes, and the reason automation stopped. Correct
- CMove the agent to a configuration with a substantially larger context window so it can hold the entire conversation in view at the moment it composes the free-text summary it hands to the human reviewer.
- DInstruct the agent in the system prompt to write a concise summary covering the customer, the order, the steps already taken and the outstanding question before it calls the escalation tool with its free-text field.
Why A is wrong: Tempting because no information is lost and completeness feels safe. It is wrong because the transcript is already in the ticket and the complaint is that it is unusable at 40 turns, so adding payloads increases the reading burden that caused the symptom.
Why B is correct: Correct because a required-field schema turns the handoff into a contract that an incomplete call cannot satisfy, so every escalated ticket arrives carrying the identifiers and the attempt history the human needs.
Why C is wrong: Tempting because summary quality does degrade when relevant turns fall out of context. It is wrong because a 40-turn support conversation fits comfortably already, so the missing fields reflect an unspecified summary contract rather than a capacity limit.
Why D is wrong: Tempting because it names the right content and costs almost nothing to ship. It is wrong because nothing validates the result: a free-text field accepts a summary that silently omits the order number, which is the exact failure being reported.