Automotive AI agent · Fixed ops

Warranty-Claim Triage AI Agent

Read the repair order, the technician's story, the parts used and the coverage in force, then assemble a claim file — the operation stays the manufacturer's and an administrator submits it.

Typical delivery: 4–6 weeks
Deployment: Your stack
Claim submission: Administrator
After launch: Agent Care

What this agent does

Builds the claim file, not the claim

01
Read the repair order as written — the concern, the technician's story, the parts, the sublet and the time punches.
02
Pull the vehicle's own record — in-service date, odometer at write-up, terms and campaigns open against the VIN.

Reason

03
Match the story to the manufacturer's published labour operation and the allowance already set against it.
04
Read the narrative for the concern, the cause and the correction the manufacturer's procedure asks for.
05
Check parts, sublet invoices and prior-approval numbers against what that operation is meant to carry.

Decide

06
Hold a file where the documentation, the coverage or the authorisation would not stand up in an audit.
07
Route added operations, straight time and repeat visits to the service manager who has to approve them.

Out

08
Present a claim file with the gaps named, for a warranty administrator to correct and submit.
09
Keep the repair order as it arrived, the gaps raised and every correction the administrator made.

Product statement

The agent assembles and checks. The labour operation and its allowance belong to the manufacturer, the submission carries a named administrator, and coverage is the manufacturer's to decide.

Example workflow

One repair order, end to end

Agent

Human

1Repair order closedA warranty-flagged repair order arrives from the DMS with its lines, parts, sublet and time punches
2Vehicle and coverage readVIN, in-service date, odometer at write-up, the terms that apply and the campaigns open on that vehicle
3Story matched to an operationThe technician's words matched to a published labour operation and the allowance it already carries
4Documentation checkedConcern, cause and correction, the signed authorisation, parts retention, sublet and any prior approval

No human action required

Stages 1 to 4 run without a person in the loop — the coverage read, the operation match and the documentation check all finish before anyone is asked to look. Nothing has left the dealership at the end of them.

5DecisionSplits on whether the file would hold up if it were audited

File would hold up

Reaches the administrator ready to check and send.

File would not hold up

Held with the gap named, for a person to close.

Warranty administrator

Reads the repair order against the operation, the allowance and the coverage, closes the gaps and submits the claim under their own name.

Submit · Correct · Return to the technician

Submitted — handed back

6Claim file assembledWritten to the claim draft in the DMS; the submit action and the administrator's name are not the agent's
7Outcome evaluatedAdministrator edits, manufacturer rejections, resubmissions and what came back as a debit months later

Debits

A chargeback landing months later is scored against what the agent said at the time.

What should not run autonomously

Human approval stays in control

Outside the boundary — human approval required

8 items

Submitting a claim to the manufacturer.
- Deciding whether a repair is covered.
- Changing a labour operation or its time allowance.
- Certifying that the repair was carried out.
Automation boundary
Agent acts unaided
- ✓Read the repair order, the parts and the time punches as recorded.
- ✓Look up terms, in-service date and campaigns open against the VIN.
- ✓Suggest which published operation the technician's story matches.
- ✓Name the documentation gaps and hold the file for a person to close.
The agent writes the claim draft and the gaps it found. The submission, and the allowance behind it, are not its to write.
- Authorising a repair or an added operation.
- Signing off straight time or extra hours.
- Deciding a vehicle is eligible for a campaign.
Accepting or appealing an audit debit.

Example output

One warranty line, annotated

Everything the agent puts forward is attached to the repair order it was written on and the terms in force at write-up.

Claim file · single warranty line

Illustrative example

Repair order: One warranty line
Technician's story: Rough running, coil replaced
Coverage: In term
Claim file: Held — cause not written
Confidence: 88%
Labour operation: As published, unaltered

As received

The repair order as the advisor and the technician wrote it, and the terms read from the vehicle's own record.

Evidence used

Published operation match
Odometer at write-up
Open campaign on the VIN

Why it was held

The story names what was replaced, not what was found. An auditor reads no cause.

What the score decides

Confidence ranks what the administrator checks first. It never decides submission.

Action

SubmitCorrectReturn to the technician

Value

Where AI adds value

The same four claims, placed at the point in the workflow where each one applies.

Where the value lands

Value 01 – 04

Warranty-flagged repair orders

Closed in your DMS

03Match & check

Read from the published guide

Use the labour operations as the manufacturer publishes them, the allowance already set against each, the terms that apply and the campaigns open on that VIN.

01Approved path

Stop rebuilding the claim by hand

The operation, the parts, the punches and the coverage arrive already assembled, so the administrator starts from a file instead of a repair order.

02Human review

Find the gap before the auditor does

A missing cause line, an unsigned authorisation or a part nobody kept is raised while the vehicle is still on site, not at the audit two years on.

Build an evidence trail

Retain the repair order as written, the operation matched, the terms read, the gaps raised, the administrator's edits and what the manufacturer paid — on both paths.

Integrations

Typical integrations

Five system groups connect to the same agent. Which of them are in scope is decided in discovery.

DMS & repair orders
- CDK Global
- Reynolds
- Tekion
- Dealertrack
- Time-clock and dispatch data
Manufacturer systems
- Claim portals
- labour-time guides
- Campaign and VIN lookup
Parts & service history
- Parts inventory
- retention records
- Sublet and outside-purchase invoices

Agent

Warranty-claim triage

Reads the repair order
Matches the operation
Holds weak files

Documents & signatures
- Scanned repair orders
- e-signature
- Technician time tickets
Observability & evaluation
- OpenTelemetry
- Langfuse
- Supported monitoring/evaluation sources

Integration availability depends on the client's existing systems and API access.

Agent controls

Six layers between the model and the claim you submit

Each control wraps the one inside it. A file clears every layer before an administrator sees it, and none of them adds an hour the manufacturer has not published.

L6 · Outermost — last line of defence

Inward → L1 · closest to the model

L6Rollback / safe modeReturn claim prep to your existing process if evaluation or debit signals degrade.Roll back

L5TraceabilityRecord the repair order as written, the operation matched, the gaps raised and the edits made.Record

L4Administrator gateSubmission, the coverage question and any change to an operation stay with the people who own them.Gate

L3Documentation checkConcern, cause, correction, authorisation and parts retention are checked before a file is offered.Check

L2Published operationThe operation and its allowance come from the manufacturer's guide, never from the agent.Pin

L1Coverage readTerms are read from the in-service date and the write-up odometer on the repair order.Verify

Model coreClaim file drafted — operation matched, terms read, documentation checked and confidence

L1 – L2: Keep the vehicle and the operation right
L3: Decides whether the file could be audited
L4 – L5: Leave the signature with a person, trail kept
L6: Pulls automation back when signals degrade

How Nestack evaluates it

Evaluate the whole claim file — not only the operation it matched.

Coverage runs the whole depth of the workflow, and every layer is cut by slice.

Surface — the file the administrator opens

E1Final-output evaluationDid the claim the administrator sent match the file the agent built?
E2Step-level evaluationDid it read the right terms, operation and allowance for that VIN?
E3Tool evaluationDid it write to the correct repair order, line and claim draft?
E4Documentation-gap recallWere the gaps an auditor later found raised before the claim went?
E5Slice evaluationHow does performance change across franchise, model year and repair type?
E6Business outcomeWhat was rejected, resubmitted, or debited back months afterwards?

Floor — what the manufacturer paid and kept

Failure modes

Where each failure originates in the agent

Seven failure modes plotted against the five stages of the agent lifecycle. None of them submits a claim — the administrator's check and the manufacturer's own adjudication are the controls that stop them.

Agent lifecycle

Direction of processing →

01 · Retrieval
2 modes
- WT-01
  Coverage read at the wrong date
  Terms judged on today's odometer, not the one at write-up.
- WT-02
  Signed authorisation not on file
  The customer's approval never left the paper copy.
Stage gathers
The repair order, the parts, the punches and the terms
02 · Matching
2 modes
- WT-03
  Allowance superseded last week
  The operation was re-timed after the guide was read.
- WT-04
  Correction with no cause behind it
  The story names what was replaced, not what was found.
Stage matches
The story to a published operation and its allowance
03 · Draft / write
1 mode
- WT-05
  Overlapping operations drafted
  Two lines claim time the manufacturer pays once.
Stage drafts
The claim draft written back to the repair order
04 · Output
1 mode
- WT-06
  Repeat visit drafted as new
  A comeback loses its link to the first repair.
Stage returns
The file the administrator checks and submits
05 · Change / Version
1 mode
- WT-07
  Bulletin lands after the drafts
  A programme change moves the rule and nothing re-checks.
Stage tracks
Model, rule, labour-guide and bulletin changes

Sev-1 · a debit lands months later
Sev-2 · the file is built on wrong terms
Sev-3 · the file goes back to the shop

See the complete Automotive failure-mode catalogue

Affected slices

A new platform is what the guide has least to say about

A first-year platform changes its operations and allowances faster than anything the agent has read, and a high-voltage repair may have almost no comparable history behind it. Nestack reports performance by slice, not only in total.

Slice performance — reported separately, not only in aggregate

Illustrative example

Slice	Failure rate	Lift	Status
First model year, new platform	6.5%	3.4×	Review
EV high-voltage repairs	4.9%	2.6×	Review
Thin technician narratives	3.4%	1.8×	Watch
Single-line routine repairs	1.3%	0.7×	Normal

Bar: rework-rate lift — corrected before submission or debited after · scale 0–4.0× · tick at 2.0×

2 of 4 slices over threshold

Evidence-linked improvement

A debit in March scores a claim from November

Every file an administrator had to correct, and every line the manufacturer later took back, is scored again against what the agent put in front of them at the time.

Improvement cycle · five stages

Switchback — the path turns at Improve and returns at Learn

01
Detect
Administrator edits, manufacturer rejections, or a debit on an audited sample.
02
Diagnose
Separated into terms read, operation matched, documentation gap, approval routing and repeat-visit linking.
03
Improve
Match rules and gap checks change under your fixed-ops change control, with a named approver.
04
Verify
Re-run on stored repair orders from that franchise, model year and repair type, including the debited ones.
05
Learn
The debited line is added to the pre-submission checks, and the reason goes into your warranty office's own guide.
Learn → Detect
The return edge. A debit closes when the check that would have caught it is running on the next repair order — not when the appeal is filed.

Typical build scope

Twelve workstreams across six weeks

The build scope read against the delivery timeline. Week structure follows the six-week plan — discovery, records and terms, matching and checks, evaluation, integration, then supervised submission and handover.

Workstream

Week 1Week 2Week 3Week 4Week 5Week 6

01Warranty-claim discovery and boundaries.Week 1
02Coverage terms and campaign-lookup mapping.Week 1, Week 2
03DMS repair-order and time-punch access.Week 1, Week 2
04Labour-operation guide and allowance sync.Week 2
05Repair-order and narrative normalisation.Week 2, Week 3
06Story-to-operation matching logic.Week 3
07Documentation sufficiency checks.Week 3, Week 4
08Approval routing to service management.Week 4
09Evaluation suite, slices and past-debit replay.Week 4, Week 5
10Claim-draft write-back to the DMS.Week 5
11Audit-pack and retention-record assembly.Week 5, Week 6
12Observability, deployment and Agent Care handover.Week 6

12 workstreams · 6 weeks · bar shows the weeks a workstream is active — several run in parallel

Final scope and sequence confirmed in discovery

Engagement tiers

What each tier includes

Rows are the capabilities named in each tier's scope. Higher tiers include everything below them.

Capability✓ in scope · — not at this tier	PilotOne rooftop, one franchise	ProductionProduction DMS and portal integration	AdvancedMulti-rooftop / multi-franchise
Introduced at Pilot
Repair orders read and claim files drafted	✓	✓	✓
Operations matched to the published guide	✓	✓	✓
Coverage and campaign lookup by VIN	✓	✓	✓
Documentation sufficiency checks	✓	✓	✓
Submission by a named administrator	✓	✓	✓
Baseline evaluation	✓	✓	✓
Introduced at Production
Approval routing to service management	—	✓	✓
Claim-draft write-back to the DMS	—	✓	✓
Observability and evaluation	—	✓	✓
Audit-pack and retention-record assembly	—	✓	✓
Introduced at Advanced
Multi-rooftop rules and enterprise controls	—	—	✓
Build price	From $5,000	From $8,000	Custom quote

Final build price: Confirmed after discovery based on rooftops and franchises in scope, DMS and manufacturer-portal integrations, claim volume, approval routing and deployment requirements.
Separate from build: Build pricing is separate from recurring Agent Care, which covers managed monitoring, evaluations, incidents and verified improvements after launch.

What we need from you

What you bring, and what we build with it

Each input maps to a piece of build scope and a week in the delivery timeline.

You bring

We build with it

01Your manufacturers' warranty policy and labour-time guides
→
Labour-operation guide and allowance sync
Week 1
02Coverage terms, in-service data and campaign lookup
→
Coverage terms and campaign-lookup mapping
Week 1
03Access to DMS repair orders, parts and technician time punches
→
DMS repair-order and time-punch access
Week 2
04A year of closed warranty repair orders as they were written
→
Repair-order normalisation and the matching baseline
Week 2
05Who approves added operations, straight time and repeat repairs
→
Approval routing to service management
Week 3
06The debits and rejections you have taken, with the claims behind them
→
Evaluation suite, past-debit replay and failure-mode testing
Week 4
07Named warranty administrators and a service manager
→
Claim-draft write-back, then supervised submission
Weeks 5–6

Nothing else is required

Deployment, documentation and Agent Care handover are ours.

Delivery timeline

Four phases across six weeks

Phases are drawn over the weeks they actually occupy. Week 5 carries both the replayed debits and the first files your administrators submit from.

Phase

DiscoveryW1
BuildW2 – W3
EvaluateW4 – W5
Pilot & LaunchW5 – W6

Week focus

W1Warranty-claim discovery, coverage terms and campaign lookup

W2Repair-order, parts and time-punch access, then normalisation

W3Story-to-operation matching and documentation sufficiency checks

W4Evaluation suite, past-debit replay and approval routing

W5DMS write-back, first supervised files and targeted corrections

W6Your administrators submit from the file, then Agent Care starts

Reading the band: Documentation checks are built in week 3, before any file is drafted for submission in week 5. A file your own auditor would debit should not reach an administrator.
At the end of W6: Files have run alongside your existing claim prep and been submitted by the administrators who sign them, with the operation and the allowance still the manufacturer's, then Agent Care takes over monitoring.
Duration: Six-week plan shown · typical delivery 4–6 weeks depending on scope confirmed in discovery.

Next step · Automotive AI agent

Build a claim-triage agent around your warranty office.

Show us one franchise, the labour-time guide behind it and a year of closed warranty repair orders as they were written. We'll rebuild those claims against the operations in force at the time and mark which of the debits you actually took we would have raised before submission.

Typical delivery: 4–6 weeks
Deployment: Your DMS and warranty stack
Claim submission: A warranty administrator
After launch: Agent Care available

Nestack Agents · Warranty-claim triage

AGT-AUT-04 · Agent Care available after launch

Warranty-Claim Triage AI Agent

Read from the published guide

Stop rebuilding the claim by hand

Find the gap before the auditor does

DMS & repair orders

Manufacturer systems

Parts & service history

Warranty-claim triage

Documents & signatures

Observability & evaluation

Coverage read at the wrong date

Signed authorisation not on file

Allowance superseded last week

Correction with no cause behind it

Overlapping operations drafted

Repeat visit drafted as new

Bulletin lands after the drafts

Detect

Diagnose

Improve

Verify

Learn

Build a claim-triage agent around your warranty office.