Pilot, PoC, and Verification Methods for Robo Claw in Food Service Startups
Once the requirements are finalized, a pilot is constructed with 1 store, 1 brand, 1 operation, and 1 system connection, and both normal and abnormal scenarios are verified before deciding whether to move to production.
It is important to narrow the scope of the pilot. Limit it to 1 store, 1 brand, 1 operation, and 1 system connection, and make sure to verify scenarios such as misclassification, incorrect summarization, wrong translation, misrecognition of menu/price/stock information, misrecognition of reservation/order information, missing allergy information, incorrect sending, incorrect updating, double execution, duplicate sending, inclusion of personal information, prompt injection, SaaS API failure/specification changes. Only after confirming that human approval, escalation to the food safety officer, stop, rollback, and switching to manual operation function as designed can you proceed to the decision for production deployment.
Who This Is For
Who This Is For
This is targeted at business owners, store managers, and customer service managers who have finalized requirements in the Refine STEP.
What You'll Decide
What You'll Decide in This Step
In the Build & Validate STEP, define the scope of the pilot, build Agent, Skill, and Tool Policy, conduct normal and abnormal tests, and decide whether to move to production.
Pilot Scope
Scope of the Pilot
It is recommended to conduct the Pilot with a limited scope according to the following units.
1 store
Even if multiple stores are operated, verification is first limited to 1 store.
1 brand
Even if multiple brands exist, focus on 1 brand.
One business process
Limit the verification to the one business process decided in Discover; do not verify multiple business processes simultaneously.
1 system connection
Limit the SaaS to connect to a minimum and make it easier to verify the approval flow.
Method
Implementation Steps
1. Build the Pilot Environment
Build Agents, Skills, and Tools with test data, without using actual customer or reservation data.
2. Implement Tool Policy
Implement the Allow/Deny range defined in Refine as a Tool Policy. Implement the final production update of menus and prices as Deny.
3. Test normal scenario
Verify whether expected classification, summarization, and draft are generated for the assumed input.
4. Test abnormal scenarios
Verify misclassification, incorrect summarization, incorrect translation, misrecognition of menu/price/inventory information, misrecognition of reservation/order information, missing allergy information, incorrect transmission, incorrect update, duplicate execution, duplicate transmission, personal information inclusion, Prompt Injection, SaaS API failure, and specification changes.
5. Confirm human approval flow
Check whether human verification and approval function properly for operations that require approval.
6. Check the escalation path to the food safety officer
Confirm that the path functions in situations related to allergies and food safety.
7. Confirm stop, rollback, and manual operation switching
Verify whether procedures to stop processing, roll back, and switch to manual operation in case of abnormalities function properly.
8. Decide in accordance with production migration criteria
Determine whether migration to production is possible according to the pre-established Go/No-Go criteria.
Data & Systems
Data and Systems Used
Human-in-the-loop
Where Human Approval Is Required
- The tester confirms and approves whether menu description proposals and answer proposals generated in the Pilot can be reflected.
- Review the Tool Policy settings by management and store manager.
- The responsible person decides on the feasibility of moving to production based on pre-established judgment criteria
Measurement
KPI
Pass rate of test scenarios
The proportion of passed normal and abnormal scenarios
Number of occurrences of incorrect updates or incorrect transmissions
Number of incorrect operations or duplicate processes detected during the Pilot period
Evaluation of acceptance by the person in charge.
Evaluation of usability and business suitability by actual users
Pitfalls
Common Pitfalls
Judged as pass with normal cases only
If abnormal case verification is omitted, the behavior during SaaS failures may be unexpected after actual operation.
Testing with actual customer and reservation data in production.
Using actual customer information or reservation data from the verification stage increases the risk of incorrect transmission and information leakage.
Not preparing rollback procedures
Without procedures to revert when problems occur, recovery takes time and impacts customer response
Go / No-Go Criteria
Checklist for production migration decision
- All normal scenario tests have passed
- Abnormal scenario (misclassification, missing allergy information, incorrect transmission, duplicate execution, Prompt Injection, SaaS API failure) has been verified
- Human approval flow functions as designed
- Rollback procedures are established and actual rollback has been confirmed
- It has been confirmed that unauthorized operations (including final updates of menus and prices in production) are rejected.
- Practical issues are resolved in acceptance testing by the person in charge.
- Procedures for switching to manual operation in case of failure are established.
FAQ
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the approximate duration of the Pilot period?
It varies depending on the complexity of the target business and connected SaaS. Since a uniform period cannot be presented, please consult individually considering the scope.
Can verification be done without using actual customer and reservation data in production?
It is possible. We recommend preparing test data that imitates real data and conducting it in a verification environment that does not include personal information.
What happens if a Pilot fails?
Review the Refine requirements and Tool Policy, and conduct the Pilot again. It is recommended to continue verification until the standards are met without forcing the transition to production.
Shall we organize the Pilot design and verification together?
The scope, test scenarios, and Go/No-Go criteria can be concretized through discussions in the formal LP.