Comment by fudged71
5 days ago
This is in line with my thinking, can you say more about how intent changes how you would use a system like this?
I had a really complex negotiation for car repairs (goodwill warranty, balancing a long list of repairs/recalls etc) which was pretty time sensitive. If I had already had my service record in a structured format along with the manufacturer's policies I feel like I could have responded with better preparation. Same for any other big maintenance items on the house, mortgage, insurance, etc.
And then there's the flip side--what do my policies and healthcare/loyalty plans cover that I'm not taking advantage of? What can be combined towards my goals etc.
For my initial system I'm not building full historical service history, insurance policies, etc. because it's a serious amount of scope on top of the core value prop, which is point-in-time "is this a good quote?". When I eventually do this, I'd need to do it proper with LLM + RAG, etc.
I do have the concept of an "asset" which could be a car, house, etc. and with enough basic info it's pretty easy for the LLM to cross reference common problems, or at least suggest questions that you should follow up on.
I'm leaving intent pretty free-form for now, the most friction I'm willing to add is 2 things:
- Basic enum preferences around budget and flexibility to help with prompting
- A claude code style "a few questions" follow up
Any additional form friction I think gets too complex.
It's funny, a lot of my research has been from subreddits for auto, homeownership, questions for people who work in trades, etc. Every time someone asks "is this quote fair", the response from the experts is almost always "But what do you want"
So in a time-sensitive repairs scenario, intent could "What get's my car safe to drive again for daily commute.... or for a long roadtrip". The output analysis could recommend which fixes are highest priority, where work could be split up, delayed etc.