I used to work as a service advisor - or as the article says, receptionist. This system will not work as described for several reasons.
1. Unless you have a recent job that matches the exact same repair/service, you have incorrectly estimated the cost of the repair. In some states, this matters a lot and will cost the shop money. Unless your LLM only quotes for labor in sane amounts for diagnostic and nothing else, you’re only adding noise. This is a disservice to the client and the shop owner. The client now has an inaccurate quote for work and the shop will get a reputation for being inaccurate in quoting work.
2. Let’s say that you manage to get the exact same job twice. Your machine now needs to source parts. Parts may have been in stock yesterday. The might be out of stock now. If they are in stock, you need to retotal the price since prices are dynamic. Did you teach the agent how to source parts? What rules does it have for sourcing used parts?
3. New jobs can’t be quoted. Even if you taught the machine how to calculate book time and margins, it still has to find the right parts. If your shop does high end work, you know how much of a pain in the ass this is. Also remember that some work requires nonobvious parts - like fluids if you need to remove a part in the way of your goal.
4. The only area I see this being useful in is pickup. The shop can mark a car as done and the LLM can call to inform the client that they can come at a preset, unchanging time to get the vehicle. If the vehicle is staying overnight, the LLM can call with a progress update.
Finally, I’d like to note that this sort of dev work goes beyond hubris. It’s dangerous. The more we assume we know without verifying, the greater the risk. In this case, the dev is risking someone else’s livelihood.
I am certainly not an expert but I agree a lot with your sentiment about the hubris - but the problem as presented in the article makes no sense to me.
If you see a value need for a receptionist, and you suspect that it is costing you thousands of dollars, wouldn't a normal response be, "I should think about hiring someone," rather than turning to an unproven, untested solution like this and leaving your business at the hands of how correct it is? I just cannot understand this line of thinking at all, reaching for a tool that would probably do a worse job than a human would do. Is it not wanting to hire? Not wanting to manage? Hype cycle? Where does this urge come from?
To take this further, if the focus really is the "luxury" part of the market, how do they expect this sort of response to go down well with customers?!
If someone is interested in paying luxury size fees, do they really want some cobbled together chatbot? I say this as an advocate for (high quality) chatbots for various practical needs, but it just seems like it is misunderstanding the customers (or maybe luxury is a bit of a loose term new in the area this mechanic works in?)
These customers own expensive cars - or at least, cars that were expensive when they were new. The car might now be ten years old or more, and the owner bought it used. They want a prestige marque, but the customer does not have the money to buy a new prestige car. So they are looking to save on service.
All the time I see cars with expensive names - BMW, Mercedes Benz - broken down on the side of the road, while old Hondas and Toyotas keep cruising by. Those are the customers for this shop: they spent all their money buying an expensive used car, and now they can't afford to maintain it and fix looming problems; meanwhile the Toyota or Hyundai driver gets maintenance and maybe even takes it to the dealer for it.
A mechanic like this can't afford to hire someone to answer the phone. Such a person is expensive, and these customers want rock-bottom prices despite the car being expensive. So a chatbot is good enough and better than nothing.
The most trustworthy mechanic I used in England had an appointment book pretty much full for four months in advance. He didn't answer the phone, didn't have a computer, just a desk diary. If you wanted him to work on your car you turned up at his workshop and spoke to him. If you were willing to wait until he'd finished whatever thing he was doing he'd take a quick look at your car and suggest a course of action. And despite his full order book if something looked urgent enough and small enough he'd fit you in quite quickly.
He charged reasonable prices, but definitely not rock bottom. He had no need to compete with the bottom feeders because every customer acted as his public relations agent.
Business owners tend to resent having to rely on and pay their workers.
Many of them believe people should line up and volunteer/be forced to work at their companies for free, the fact that they have to pay them is an insult.
They need workers, but workers are not worthy of being needed by them, or paid, so they look for any out at all.
The word you’re looking for is greed. These systems are greed enablers. The narrative used to pump them plays on greed. And so on.
Hiring a person for the job is 3000$ per month? Great let’s try to do this with 500$ and a tangle of vibecoded toothpick bridges!
For a luxury service with generous margins this is a failure-prone mentality.
They'd still try to replace workers, even if their attempted route of automation cost them more than hiring employees would, because of their resentment towards them
Aside from a cost? It's also managing the actual human being, and making sure they have enough work. If the place has 5-10 calls a day, then it's pointless to hire receptionist that will do nothing for 1 hour, and then get 2 minutes chat. It used to be pointless to build software to do that, but since claude code it's cheap enough to make sense.
receptionist as a service has been a thing for like... forever. You are never going to solve the problem of accurately estimating and quoting with AI or an answering service, so pay for someone to answer the phone and take down the details; have a mechanic or trained service rep review and estimate. Cheap code that doesn't solve the problem is not cheap.
Yes, of course. The bot can request information and the customer can provide it if they feel like it, and then someone qualified can call them back when they have their hands free.
But there's no bot, per se, needed at all. An answering machine from 1993 can do this same information-gathering job. :)
So update the device from 1993's new-fangled digital answering machine to 2009's Google Voice, and have it do the transcription from voicemail to text.
Someone will still have to call Bill back about his Honda (which is actually the Kia he bought for his daughter -- Bill is not a very technical guy these days[1] and he confuses such concepts regularly) in order to get any trading of money for services done.
It doesn't take an LLM to get there, and Bill would probably prefer to avoid being frustrated by the bot's insistent nature.
Look, you‘re kicking an open door.
I think LLMs applied like this are just a layer of complexity that os mostly replacing lower level programming solutions that could do the same thing
The transcription + callback loop is honestly underrated.
Most of the value here is just capturing intent accurately
("Honda" vs "Kia" aside) so the mechanic can prioritize
callbacks. A dumb voicemail-to-text pipeline handles that
fine. The LLM layer adds complexity without solving the
actual bottleneck, which is someone qualified picking up
the phone.
But I'm not sure that a bot can be trusted to make good decisions about priority, either. So even if it makes good decisions based on context (which it can increasingly-often do, but does not always do), it lacks the context that is necessary to form the basis of good decisions.
Suppose a message comes into the box with this form: "This is Wendy, can you call me? My car is making that noise again."
The bot might deprioritize that call because it lacks actionable contextual information. "My job as a bot is to get more jobs into the shop. This call does not have enough data to do that, so I'll shove to the bottom of list of callbacks behind more-actionable jobs."
But the mechanic? The mechanic knows Wendy's Ford very well, and he also knows Wendy. She's a been a good customer for over a decade. The mechanic also knows the noise, and that Wendy has 3 little kids and that she's vacationing 900 miles away on a road trip with those kids in that Ford. The context is all there inside of the mechanic's brain to combine and mean that this might be the highest-priority call he gets all week.
Wendy may not have actively relayed any urgency in her message, but the urgency is real and she needs called back right away. She needs answers about what to do (keep driving and look into it when she gets back? pull over immediately and get a tow to a decent local shop? maybe she even needs help finding such a shop?) pretty much immediately. Not because it means more business today, but because it means more business for years.
The mechanic can spot this from a list of transcripts in an instant and give her a ring back Right Now. The bot is NFG at this.
The addition of the bot only adds noise to the process, and that noise only works to Wendy's detriment. When the bot adds detrimental noise to Wendy's situation, it also adds detriment to the shop's longevity.
The presence of the bot -- even as a prioritizing sorting mechanism -- asymptotically shifts the state from an excellent shop that knows their customers very well to a bot-driven customer-averse hellscape.
(And no, the answer isn't to make the bot into an all-knowing oracle that actively gets fed all context. The documentation burden would be more expensive, time-wise (and thus money-wise) than hiring a competent human receptionist who answers the phone, handles the front door traffic, and absorbs context from their surroundings. A person who chatted with Wendy last Thursday right before she left for her trip is always going to be superior to a bot.)
If someone put on their website and voicemail that they were available for calls only from 8-10am (for example), or that they would return my call at that time, I'd make a point to call them then. It's reasonable that people are busy too.
Because the capital owning class in America commonly has an aversion to labor.
Labor is other humans and all their social hierarchy monkey brain bullshit activates in a way that a machine doesn’t. That’s why you’ll see companies spending equivalent or even slightly more money for a tool to do a job over a human being.
Walmart employs this amount of workers only because it is subsided by food stamps and other government assistance. The minute they were forced to actually pay for the labor they employ would fire a lot of people
You are suggesting that if the government gives you a tax break, your boss would lower your salary? Why does your boss wait for the tax break or handout and doesn't just lower your salary now?
Also what's your counterfactual here? If Walmart fired their employees tomorrow and replaced them with robots, those ex-employees would magically no longer need food stamps nor government assistance? (Or more realistically: Walmart could pivot to the Aldi model of labour and replace many low intensity jobs with fewer higher intensity jobs. For the affected workers, the outcome is the same.)
If those ex-workers don't magically get off government assistance, if Walmart is out of the picture, in what sense is Walmart to blame for their poverty?
Conversely: if Walmart laying off these workers would magically improve their welfare, why do these workers wait for Walmart to lay them off?
> Walmart could pivot to the Aldi model of labour and replace many low intensity jobs with fewer higher intensity jobs.
Yes, this is the expected change.
> For the affected workers, the outcome is the same.
No? There are two classes of affected workers:
1. Workers who have been converted to full-time with benefits. These workers benefit from the change.
2. Workers who lose their jobs. These workers are worse off.
Your argument ignores class 1.
I don't think we'll get anywhere debating the relative merits of the tradeoff of those two groups, but I personally prefer the existence of class 1. At least with that class there are some winners.
There's practically no (1). It's a different class of workers, of people than who Walmart currently employs at low intensity and low pay.
People who prefer a higher intensity, higher paying job than the bottom rung at Walmart can already get that kind of job today. They don't need to wait for Walmart to fire everyone else.
Walmart has some of these jobs already, probably. But Aldi and other companies exist. The whole Jeff Bezo's workout at Amazon Warehouses falls in a similar category too: Amazon pays pretty well for the sector and requires no prior experience, but they expect you to stay on your feed throughout.
> Walmart employs this amount of workers only because it is subsided by food stamps
And then those food stamps are used at Walmart, its a win win for Walmart and Walmart. No other country gives their poor food stamps instead of money, I wonder why?
I'm projecting, but I think you're right. Not wanting to manage is probably a large driver. I can imagine that if you've dealt with messy humans before, that a robot receptionist that's not going to show up late, call out when hungover, need an advance for a family member's surgery and then quit, is quite attractive.
Until the robot breaks for reasons unknown and you have to pay for expensive engineering time to fix it. Surprise, since the engineer vibe coded the whole thing, he also has no idea how to fix it except to get the AI to try.
> If you see a value need for a receptionist, and you suspect that it is costing you thousands of dollars, wouldn't a normal response be, "I should think about hiring someone," [...]
If you only have thousands of dollars is savings from the move, hiring someone might be too expensive.
From the post it's clear that the shop has a set schedule of services and prices that the bot is pulling from. All the things you're saying are true for a shop that needs to custom quote each job but do not apply to the situation as presented.
It's clear that the author interpreted the data that way, yes.
And perhaps the shop actually charges the same for brakes whether it is an Ford F150 or a Toyota Corolla.
But that seems very unlikely to me. While they're both very common vehicles, they are also very different and the parts have substantially different costs associated with them.
Right it's almost like the preferred solution – since the guy is the source of knowledge, but is under the hood – would be just installing a phone with a loud speaker in a garage that he could answer without using his hands.
He knows the prices and the parts, there isn't enough calls to hire a receptionist, and voice controlled systems are quite easy to make. If you use local voice recognition model, you could even mention neural networks in a write up, it's a win-win
And it's quite cheaper too, I'd estimate around 200$-300$ for a room. Most of it for a good microphone.
There's a lot of stupid keyboard punching that you need to do to create a proper quote. You can't do that from under a car.
Someone comes in for a timing belt on a car that needs timing belts. Ok, you've got the parts and labor on the belt itself, those are easy to just look up from a table. But, do you just replace the belt, replace other things related to it as well, or perhaps even go above and beyond and proactively do a water pump or something while you're in there. That's gonna depend on the relative cost/labor differences of those, the customer's intentions, the value of the car, etc.
What you really need is someone to answer the phone, pull all that info and then say "hey Jim there's some guy on the phone who needs X, the options are" and then run down all the reasonable combinations and let the tech exercise judgement. This is basically what the service writer does but ideally they get good and don't need to bother the tech for "minor" judgement stuff.
And that's all assuming that this is a cookie cutter job.
> Finally, I’d like to note that this sort of dev work goes beyond hubris. It’s dangerous. The more we assume we know without verifying, the greater the risk. In this case, the dev is risking someone else’s livelihood.
I think this is a bit of an overstatement. The dev states it’s her brother’s business, and one can assume he’s asked her to help him out.
Getting the service to be 100% perfect is of course a near impossible challenge, but that’s most likely not the business owner’s concern — they simply want a way to avoid totally losing business. If the service can convert even 10% of customers with a rough quote and timeline it’s most likely useful.
High end shops live off reputation alone. Usually they’re started by a very skilled mechanic who does racing or some other specialty automotive hobby.
The exit plan for these guys is usually to sell the shop. Most buyers are usually skilled white collar workers looking for a new hobby. The shop folds after that because they no longer have the same connections to the specialty community.
You can get business outside of the specialty auto scene. In fact, it’s required since that’s what actually makes money. Google reviews and word of mouth are king here.
So do you remove the owner from the customer experience? I wouldn’t. But if you are going to do that, then, understanding the risk is important.
The shop can mark a car as done and the LLM can call to inform the client that they can come at a preset, unchanging time to get the vehicle. If the vehicle is staying overnight, the LLM can call with a progress update.
This doesn't need an LLM. It can be and has already been done for many years with a simple TTS.
The solution is to have the quote manually prepared, entered into the system of record, and then automate the outbound phone call to let the customer know, and agree to the work based on the accurate quote. That's the savings.
One of my specialties is creating call centers using Amazon Connect. I agree with everything you said. I wouldn’t let an LLM go near doing a quote or ordering parts.
I share your skepticism but it does seem like the author addressed 1 and 3:
> When a caller asks something that isn’t in the knowledge base, the AI doesn’t guess. It tells the caller it doesn’t have that information, asks for their name and a good callback number, and saves that to MongoDB. Dane gets a list of callbacks to return — no lost leads.
> The escalation path is not an edge case — it’s a core feature.
I haven't been a service advisor before, but if it's anything like working the phones at other retailers, you get a lot of the same questions over and over again, and a bot could certainly answer those things correctly.
> The phone rings, he can’t answer, the customer hangs up and calls someone else. That’s a lost job — sometimes a $450 brake service, sometimes a $2,000 engine repair — just gone because no one picked up.
Sure, that's a problem, but...
> Dane gets a list of callbacks to return — no lost leads.
Yeah. So. I'm still going to hang up, phone somewhere else, and you get no business. I'm also doubly annoyed because not only did you waste my time speaking to a computer, it couldn't answer the question so I'm now worse off than if you'd ignored the call.
Yeah - this scenario presupposes that if I need my car fixed I'm going to wait for you to give me a call back, rather than continue working down my list.
The AI doesn’t have to solve every problem to solve some problems. If it can answer 10% of questions, isn’t that 10% better than having all of them go to voicemail unanswered?
The data the bot has to work with is stated to already be available the website.
Therefore, I'd never call on the phone to find those answers -- but those are the only answers the bot has to offer.
The only reason I'd ever call is for answers that the website (and therefore, the bot) does not provide. Calling on the phone and getting a bot that insists on giving me data that I already have would only serve to waste my time and frustrate me.
It would probably frustrate me enough to hang up and call a different shop immediately, and name-and-shame the place.
I know how to Google shit. By the time I start dialing telephone numbers, I've already Googled this shit.
When I call a local shop I want to talk to someone at that local shop (or at very least, their voicemail) -- not a regurgitating bot.
But, again, that's just me.
---
So I'm imagining my dad, who's in his mid-70s and has never Googled a single thing in his entire life. At least superficially, he sounds like an ideal candidate that can be helped with this automated receptionist.
Except: When he calls the shop and has to talk to the bot instead of a person or their voicemail, he's also definitely hanging up immediately and calling the next place on his list. This doesn't help him at all, nor does it help the shop.
---
For the shop, the cost of frustrated people who vent to their friends about the experience may very well be higher the cost of not always being available to answer the phone.
There is no way to ensure that the AI doesn't guess. You can do all the prompting and RAG you want but sometimes it's just going to make shit up and ignore instructions
It might be the same calls if you work at a shop that only works on one model year vehicle doing a set of services. Note that services are not repairs.
If you are already drowning in work, make everything expensive enough to cover the errors. You always have some % chance to lose money with each customer. If the estimate is to high one can give a discount afterwards.
Could play the call on the speaker and decide if it is worth dropping your tools and walking to the phone. Those 10-20 daily marketeers are definitely not it.
> Finally, I’d like to note that this sort of dev work goes beyond hubris. It’s dangerous. The more we assume we know without verifying, the greater the risk. In this case, the dev is risking someone else’s livelihood.
Every single phone call to a business will be having this in the back office within 5 to 10 years.
Couldn't you blast through all of that with some kind of warning like: "All labor and part prices are estimates, for exact pricing leave your name and number and we will get back to you".
From the Washington state attorney general’s website:
“ Estimate: You are entitled to a written price estimate for the repairs you have authorized before the work is performed, only if you deal face-to-face with the facility and the work is expected to cost more than $100. Once you receive an estimate, the facility may not charge you more than 10% above the estimated costs without your prior approval.
The estimate includes, among other things: the odometer reading; a description of the problem or the specific repair requested; choice of alternatives for the customer; the estimated cost; labor and parts necessary for the specific diagnosis/repair requested”
So the LLM builds an estimate. Maybe it’s under 10% difference when the customer walks through the door.
When it’s not, there’s a big problem. Yes, this is still before work has begun, but now you’ve wasted the customers time. And potentially wasted their money if the vehicle was towed in.
I didn't mean "estimate" in some technical/legal sense, replace the word with "our best guess" or whatever terminology is used by the 1000s of companies that are using LLMs but not being held legally responsible for what they say.
> “ Estimate: You are entitled to a written price estimate for the repairs you have authorized before the work is performed, only if you deal face-to-face with the facility and the work is expected to cost more than $100. Once you receive an estimate, the facility may not charge you more than 10% above the estimated costs without your prior approval.
I don't see how "estimates" given over the phone by the LLM and "estimate" as mentioned in this quote refers to the same thing, for the legal purpose of this statement. This would be strictly before repairs have been authorized, and it's obviously not a written estimate. If the client requests a written estimate, it would have to come at a later time after the human mechanic reviews related costs (like specialty parts availability/ship times), or the client bringing the machine in for physical inspection by the mechanic.
From my understanding of the article, it doesn't sound like the LLM is built to fully circumvent a customer phone call by the owner/mechanic before approving a job request unmanned: It's simply to not let go of a client lead because there was no one available to answer the phone, without needing to hire a full-time phone receptionist.
It seems highly unlikely a customer is towing their vehicle in without talking to the mechanic directly first, who now has some context and the ability to sift nonsense requests from realistic ones from the logs before calling or writing to the customer on their own time with all the expert nuance necessary.
I didn’t say it was a written estimate. I said the opposite.
Do you know how towing a car into this particular shop works? If so, please enlighten me.
In most shops, mechanics do not talk to customers. Mechanics get paid to work on vehicles - not talk on phones.
Regardless, the potential for sticker shock exists if the LLM and the mechanic disagree on pricing. You can and will lose customers due to this. I’ve seen it happen. That’s why service advisors are trained to only quote for diagnostics over the phone.
Finally, in the sales training we got, we were taught to not compete on price. This rule doubly applies to a high end shop. They make their money by competing on quality and timeliness. Adding the LLM to the equation compromises both of those.
Realistically, every single mechanic has Google reviews that say “they said it would be $C but it was $D” and so on. You’re claiming a level of rigor I don’t think any real mechanic has.
A blog post like this is half the story. I’d like to see the results. Did your brother get more business? What were the failure modes? Did customers care if it was a bot or not?
It also ignores easily available solutions that could have been deployed prior to AI
For example, even if it shows a boost of $100,000 per month in revenue. It could likely have been achieved with a shared virtual assistant / receptionist for about $200-1000 per month (depending on exactly call volumes).
So really, the revenue was already lost and going forward you’re just deciding to capture it. You've created a more complicated mouse trap than what was already available to you. The difference is saving a couple hundred dollars of labor less whatever your AI/tech costs are. I’d still go the human route because it’s more future proof and if this is a luxury service, human service is always going to feel more luxurious.
This is such an important point. My plumber that we always call is extremely busy and usually doesn't have availability for at least a week. He is a one man shop and prefers it that way. You call his phone, leave a voicemail and he calls you back whenever he is able to. I asked him if he wants to get more business by automating his incoming calls and he said "not really, I am already very busy and have enough business. I don't need these tools".
So we cannot always assume that the business owner (especially the solo mom and pops) wants more business. Good ones are already very busy.
This seems to be true with every trade shop in my area. HVAC, plumbing, electrical, landscaping, appliance repair, and so on: Nobody picks up the phone, and when you do get someone, they don't seem to be very interested in your job unless it sounds like big money to them. Everyone already apparently has as much work as they want, and if you're a small fish you're out of luck.
Electrician here. I had zero unemployment time between my current job and the last. Sent ~5 applications, had two interviews. Current employer called me in the afternoon offering me a job, after interviewing the same morning.
Yea.. When people say "you can make great money in the trades" what they usually mean is that you can make great money by owning a trade business and/or hiring tradesmen. Which is kind of different than being a tradesman.
True but electricians have a real system without bullshit, we wire something up and it just works, it keeps working too! You press the button, the light goes on, you press it again and it goes off! Except from audio all of the automatons come with the right plugs.
You would think after 50 years software devs build something similar but besides the <input type="submit"> button absolutely nothing works like that. Switching on the lights by clicking on a button using the mouse would already be a serious enterprise level undertaking. Then when you think you are done someone in Russia and someone in China are also able to control your lights.
There are no labels on our buttons, the dimensions are in exact mm. If you ask a software dev they will tell you mm have something to do with printing. On a screen a button can have any size, no one knows really how big it turns out regardless which of the 50 different units you use. pt rm rem px % vw etc etc
Sounds pretty unscientific? Can you at least tell me when it is finished and how much it will cost? Did I say something wrong?
Danish electrician average is ~80k. Danish software developer is ~100k, but with much higher variance.
However there's also quite a lot of difference in training between Danish and American electricians. I specialised in telecom - part of my curriculum was configuring Cisco routers. The subject of my oral exam was TCP/IP. I love the variety. Yesterday I was chasing down a rogue DHCP server on a network. Today I was mounting a drainage pump controller.
But as they say, do what makes you happy. I would rather be happy at 60k than miserable at 130k.
There's this giant no-man's land of more work for less profit they have to cross between "reliably profitable business run by its founders" to "reliably profitable business with a half a dozen or more employees". A helper you can keep tabs on but can work without often pencils out. A crew of 2, 3, 4, that's often less profitable per hour of the owner's labor (with a way higher labor minimum) than just working yourself or with a helper. Only when you have things humming along do you actually make more money than if you were working on those task yourself.
You almost certainly have to take out huge loans against the business to get across that gulf (your employees need those capital investments that you use to do your work). When you consider the long term outlook and the age of most business owners making such a decision it's no surprise that many choose to simply stay small rather than take on a huge amount of work and stress to maybe make more money years in the future.
Basically there's a ton of work for no reward between "I own my job" and "I own a business"
That's wild. Plumbing especially seems like a field where if you need a plumber you need them right now, not a week from now.
I guess as a plumber having enough of the type of jobs that can wait a week that you can turn away the urgent calls might be one of those feature-not-a-bug type situations.
It depends. If you need a faucet changed out with this new fancy one, or if you want to replace a toilet with a new one using less GPF, or any other kind of update/remodel.
Not every job a plumber does is an emergency situation. I used a plumber to help me setup a backyard project to set up a portable propane tankless gas water heater. I took a look at buying at the parts and pieces I would need, but they needed special tools that would only be used once if I were to buy them. Instead, I had the plumber do it for me with all of the necessary parts/pieces on the truck plus the tools to do it. It cost me less than it would have to buy everything. Now, I just need a cold water feed, and I have a portable hot/cold running system.
You can shut the entire network off, shower/poop at neighbours places or work, laundry at the local self-laundry shop and brush you teeth with a bootle of water. Inconvenient sure, but it would as much problematic to be denied electricity for a long time: lights off, fridge off, no heating, boiler off… there’s alternatives but the usual way for us is to share a long electric cord by an open window… so obligatory work-and-stay-at-home if you’re lucky to have an appropriate activity.
Your plumber story is exactly what trips up most vertical AI pitches I see. The founder assumes every missed call is lost revenue, but for capacity-constrained shops, a missed call is just triage they did not have to do. Curious if anyone has seen an AI receptionist actually grow a shop's revenue vs just adding a layer on top of an already-full queue.
I think that’s wrong for a couple reasons. I think author doesn’t fully understand the problem or doesn’t explain it well leading to this assumption.
He wouldn’t care to get these extra jobs if he’s full, so why do this to begin with. He could however hire another mechanic if he books more jobs and grow his business to one of shop owner instead of mechanic (no idea if this is his motivation or not).
It’s likely he’s not actually under the hood all day but If phone rings twice a day and it just happens to be he’s under the hood at those times, he misses the call and it’s like he’s under the hood all day. It doesn’t mean he has no capacity, it just means he’s missing some calls throughout the day.
I tried getting some work quotes not long ago and was surprised by how many local shops still don't have: (1) website that takes info and emails/calls back, (2) voicemail, or (3) having one or both of those and didn't call back all week. I suspected they had all the business they can handle. I did get a call back later in the week from one that said as much.
Why would a car repair shop need a website for? All I care about is the phone number, with the hope that someone will pick it up. IDK about the world, but in Poland every single mechanic I know has no downtime at all. The better ones have queues measured in weeks or months for simple repairs. They don't care about extra business, the business will find them anyway.
I've made that website! Just put the name and a big fat print phone number in the middle of the page.
There use to be a windows shop around here that had a game on the website where you have to throw stones at windows. Limited time per house, limited stones, more points for big windows, run away when you hear police sirens.
Hard to estimate how much extra work they got out of it but I imagine it > 0.
That generates more supply (mechanics) not less demand (volume of broken cars). Sometimes having excess demand is ideal to keep the market balanced in your favor.
Increasing price would just move up the demand curve (less people willing to spend the increased amount on fixing their broken car) and the mechanic would earn more.
ofc overtime it's likely more mechanics enter the market to compete, but that wouldn't be instant. and when it does happen the table stakes would be that everyone's phone call get's answered
Could he not just increase the price until the number of calls matches the time he has?
I know it's not that simple, but my gut says theres value to at least hearing out the people taking action to call you. Especially if that's automated and low cost to you.
Based on the post I would guess it hasn't been live long and gone through a ton of battle testing.
I wish her luck though, things get much murkier as you start stacking more intents and it is no longer just a chatbot that funnels to text to speech.
People also assume "AI" is a miracle worker now so they will be pissed when they say "Yeah just email me at charlezmcnaughton@gmail.com" and it spells it completely wrong. Like there is no reality where a transcriber is going to reliably transcribe most emails correctly, so for shit where it is vital to be 100% accurate (email, name, etc.) you have a battle on your hands.
side: I found Anthropic to be prohibitively slow for live voice chat. I was getting response times in the 1-2s range which when combined with the other parts of generating a response led to 2.5s+ silent periods before responding. Groq is insanely fast if you want pure performance from an LLM. Like <200ms to complete a response.
I needed to replace my car's windshield in a hurry while on an extended trip. I called around to see who might have one in stock that could do a rush order. There was one place that had an automated voice system, and I hung up because it kept redirecting the conversation to get me to hand over more information than necessary to answer my question.
If I were already an existing customer and just wanted to schedule an oil change, it'd be fine, though I'd probably just schedule on the website anyway. I'm really only going to call in if I have an unusual circumstance and actually need to speak with someone.
Automated voice systems that try to sound human but are in fact purely scripted are insanely annoying. E.g. "I think you said 'windshield', is that correct? ... Got it, thanks!"
If you only have 4 options, just give me the old school list of voice options and I'll press 1 through 4, in less time, and being only moderately annoyed.
But a knowledgeable AI system as described in the article - that knows what it knows and tells you when it doesn't - could work great. If it had access to inventory and calendar, it might have worked for you. The question is whether the implementation lives up to the high expectations set by the articles.
Me too, but I wonder whether we're in the minority here. I'm sure there must be plenty of people who just call places to get information easily found via the web, or there wouldn't be so many automated phone systems that explain how to get information via their website.
I know someone who works on the voice response system for $LARGEBANK. She says that more than 95% of calls are just to find out a checking account balance.
That's fine, and there's no need for AI pretending to be a human, or to ask me to talk to a computer as if it is a human. Routine decision trees work really well here.
In fact, decision trees are nice because they tell your more or less up front what they're capable of.
What really sucks (AI or decision tree, either way) is when they don't let you easily speak with someone.
I'd argue a well designed AI assistant would be considerably better than a decision tree for that use case. Decision trees are slow because you normally need to wait through several options before getting to the one you're interested in. (Though sure, perhaps not if your call is literally for the most common thing.) But with an AI you could jump straight to what you're interested in.
"Hi, I'm the LargeBank AI Assistant. How can I help you?"
"I'd like to know the balance of my checking account."
And then authenticate and get the balance as usual. Simpler and faster.
Agreed that it becomes a problem if it's seen as a replacement for human agents though. In an ideal world it would actually free up the human agents for when they're actually needed. In reality it'll probably be some of each.
I believe that. Probably 95% of my support calls to online shops are about order status (aka: the website shows "in preparation" for a week already, I need to talk to a real person).
Often the relevant information is a pain to find on a website, but even if it isn't, the people who answer the phone often have important context like "Usually we do offer that recently but one of our suppliers..." or "We can do that, but maybe instead..." or "Oh the website isn't updated with..."
Maybe I am in the minority here, but I appreciate the new crop of LLM based phone assistants. I recently switched to mint mobile and needed to do something that wasn't possible in their app. The LLM answered the call immediately, was able to understand me in natural conversation, and solved my problem. I was off the call in less than a minute. In the past I would have been on hold for 15-20 minutes and possibly had a support agent who didn't know how to solve my problem.
Also I bet the LLM didn't speak too fast, enunciate unclearly, have a busted and crackly headset obscuring every other word it said to you, or have an accent that you struggled to understand either.
I was on the wrong end of some (presumably) LLM powered support via ebay's chatbot earlier this week and it was a completely terrible experience. But that's because ebay haven't done a very good job, not because the idea of LLM-powered support is fundamentally flawed.
Amazon support does this pretty well with their chat. The agent can pull all the relevant order details before the ticket hits a human in the loop, who appears to just be a sanity check to approve a refund or whatever. Real value there.
Didn't work for me. I had a package marked delivered that never showed. The AI initiated a return process (but I didn't have anything to return). I needed to escalate to a human.
My big question is. Why has the company and their development process failed so horribly they need to use LLM instead the app? Surely app could implement everything LLM can too.
Don't LLMs still have to interface with whatever system allows them to do things? Or are they really given free range to do anything at all even stuff no one considered?
I imagine they just help with triaging the customers query so it ends up with the right department/team. Also probably some tech support first in case it can solve the issue first.
I had a similar situation with a chatbot: I posted a highly technical question, got a very fast reply with mostly correct data. Asked a follow-up question, got a precise reply. Asked to clarify something, got a human-written message (all lowercase, very short, so easy to distinguish from the previous LLM answers).
Unfortunately, the human behind it was not technically-savvy enough to clarify a point, so I had to either accept the LLM response, or quit trying. But at least it saved me the time from trying to explain to a level 1 support person that I knew exactly what I was asking about.
Agreed; they're far better than the old style robots, which is what you'd have to deal with otherwise.
More generally, when done well, RAG is really great. I was recently trying out a new bookkeeping software (manager.io), and really appreciated the chatbot they've added to their website. Basically, instead of digging through the documentation and forums to try to find answers to questions, I can just ask. It's great.
i genuinely don't get the point of this. isn't it easier to have a native chat interface? phone is a much worse UX and we simply use it because of the assumption that a human is behind it. once that assumption doesn't hold - phone based help has no place here.
I had a recent experience with the Lowes agent today. It was pretty decent! Until I asked "how many of that item is available", and it didn't know how to answer that (It was a clearance item). At least when I asked to talk to a human I got one in a few seconds.
When the problem is well-defined, the backend systems are integrated, and the AI has actual authority to act, it can be dramatically better than traditional support queues
I think the point is: If there is an API somewhere in Company's systems that does what the customer wants, why have a phone tree or an LLM in the way? Just add a button to the app itself that calls that API.
most support volume comes through voice, and you need a layer to interpret what the customer intent is
additionally for many use cases it's not feasible from an eng standpoint to expose a separate api for each entire workflow, instead they typically have many smaller composable steps that need to be strung together in a certain order depending on the situation
There's no reason the app itself couldn't string together those composable steps into an action performed when the user invokes it. OP's point is there is that neither an LLM or a voice layer is really required, unless you're deliberately aiming to frustrate the user by adding extra steps (chat, phone call). Customer intent can be determined with good UX.
What could the LLM be doing that wasn't possible inside the app? At the end of the day, the LLM is just making an API call to whatever system needed to be updated anyway, that could have just been a button in an app.
Just to be clear, the LLM assistant could be a great supplement to the app for people with disabilities or those who struggle with phone apps for whatever reason, but for most people the LLM phone call seems worse.
There's plenty of time for me inside the Amazon app where I'll click the button to get a refund or replacement on an order and go through the little radio options wizard to select the reasoning, and it will tell me it's not eligible for a refund in the end.
I'll switch to the AI chat where it lets you select your order and I'll do the same thing, and it has no issue telling me it can give me a refund and process it instantly.
So my case, the two seem to behave differently. And these are on items that say they're eligible for refunds to begin with when you first order them.
If the item is eligible for refund and the wizard fails where the LLM succeeds, then that's obviously a bug in the wizard, not a special capability of the LLM. It's also wasted money for Amazon, burning tokens at scale for something that could have been a simple API call.
>and he’s losing thousands of dollars per month because he misses hundreds of calls per week. He’s under the hood all day. The phone rings, he can’t answer, the customer hangs up and calls someone else. That’s a lost job — sometimes a $450 brake service, sometimes a $2,000 engine repair — just gone because no one picked up.
How much does it cost to have an outsourced receptionist? Even if it is 500 a month if we are really talking about thousands of dollars per month lost your ROI is still crazy.
Never mind an outsourced receptionist, some of those calls could be handled simply by the mailbox. Of course, some people will hang up once the mailbox message starts - but then again, some will also hang up once they realize they're talking to an AI chatbot, so...
This is the critical data —» how many people hang up on the AI chatbot vs how many people hang up on the voice message prompt.
If it is even close, well, the AI needs to be improved.
If the AI is way ahead, but still loses/drops more than a live receptionist (outsourced or in-house), the AI either needs improvement, or to be dumped for a live receptionist, and that's kind of a spreadsheet problem (how many jobs lost in each case, vs costs).
I think the question of lost opportunities versus costs is the best thing to look at here. You could pay a receptionist like 50-60k a year but they have to bring in the work. Maybe the AI dumps a percentage over a real receptionist but they still bring in more than the mailbox. But there's a cost to the AI too.
But the real question you should also ask is what else can that human do for you that the AI can't because they have eyes and ears and hands?
The question is more why employ a full time receptionist when fractional services are available and it’s an old well established industry. A couple hundred dollar a month could employ a human only when the phone rings and to schedule their visit plus any FAQ. I’m sure Ruby.com already has plenty of auto shop customers.
A barber won’t be able to service that many customers anyway. A barbershop which gets a phone call every two minutes probably has several barbers on staff and a receptionist.
He will still need a pipeline of work to keep himself and his team busy. Someone has to do that job, if clients are self selecting then it makes sense to automate it if possible.
Big old ad for Mongo right in the middle even with all my ad blocking, so I assume that is it. I hate being One of Those People because the trend toward doubting everything bums me out, but this is not 1982. People with fancy cars are not using some local guy with a lift in his backyard and even if they were, where is Dane located that he is missing 100s of calls for work on the Rolls, Ferrari, Bentley in addition to the ones that are keeping him so dangerous busy?
I have a friend who runs a trade with an outsourced reception - they employ 3 full time people and the reception is about £150/mo for 9-5 manning of calls. He does the scheduling in the evenings.
If we take OP’s post at face value, presumably his brother is already at 100% capacity otherwise he wouldn’t be missing all these calls.
No - £150/mo for the service. I asked him and he said they take the calls, write up notes and he handles the callbacks/etc himself.
I don’t know if he’s “tested”, but he said he’s happy enough with the service. We don’t always have to AB test every possible option - sometimes good enough is good enough.
It's called a telephone answering service. Different companies have different billing methods, but the most common billing method is to bill for "work time" - you pay a monthly fee with a set amount of work time and then pay overage fees for any usage in excess of the monthly allotment. It's a good solution if you don't expect to be hammered with calls during your business hours (e.g. you expect to get at most 30 calls a day rather than 30 calls an hour), but it starts to get prohibitively expensive after you reach a certain volume. It's a good idea to keep track of the usage and consider "upgrading" to a full-time staff member once you get to a certain usage amount (then you just direct calls to the answering service when that staff member isn't available). It doesn't work very well if your call length is long. You also need to be realistic about what you want the agents to do. It's not like they can provide top tier support or resolve issues. Expect it to be exactly what it is, which is a telemessaging service. You'll usually get better luck with ones that specialize in specific industries. There are some that only answer for law practices, for example. Some only provide day-time support, while others run 24/7.
Well presumably 150 is what you pay to use the service, and they have like 100+ companies using it.
The model is exactly like Planet Fitness or similar gyms: It doesn't work if everyone visits at once, but you plan on most people using it once a week.
Yeah exactly - I don’t know how many calls he gets but it’s less than an amount to employ a full time person, but more than enough that it’s worth having someone to pick up a phone he can stay on the job.
A good 'Service Writer' (the term you use for this job) isn't cheap and typically aren't outsourced. Usually because your (local) competition is going to be using them too. And also because customers aren't going to trust a person that is writing service for multiple shops.
That said, a good service writer is worth their weight in gold. Also, they are typically going to be the person you end up selling the business to when you retire. Most mechanics aren't good enough at the business side of things to actually buy, but service writers are.
Generally, by whether they know what’s going on at the shop. Usually if I’m calling on the phone, it’s for a specific answer that’s not gettable through a computer.
“Hey can you look out and see if Joe’s almost done with the blue Chrysler?” is an easy ask for the phone answerer at my local Joe’s shop (it’s his wife, and as a bonus she’ll also holler at him or his crew to hurry up because @alwa is waiting on it).
Contrast with the grant-funded pharmacy I use. Some management type suggested they could deal with their insane level of overwork by automating away the phones to a hostile and labyrinthine network of IVRs. Oh, it has “AI,” but only to force choices between forks in decisions trees corresponding to questions I didn’t have—and every path still eventually ends in “this voice mailbox is full, goodbye.”
After literal hours of my life trying to wrestle their IVRs into helping—I do sympathize with their workload and don’t want to be a special snowflake—I now drive 30 minutes to ask questions face to face.
In general I’ve maxed out what’s discoverable by automated means before I call. So a call center is both useless and insulting.
Responsible (directly or indirectly) for quite a few of them, mostly oldish and wheezy; I’m not myself mechanical; and we use the shop mostly for routine maintenance—rotate the tires every few thousand miles, swap the brake pads, deal with the oil changes/fluids/filters, etc.
Partly as a preventative measure: we trust them. In the rare cases when they find something, it’s real. As a consequence we get ahead of brewing problems.
Plus loyalty, to some extent; we try to throw work their way when we can, even if we probably could handle it ourselves. The relationship between our families goes back a good 60 years by now.
Fully grant that my situation is unlikely to be representative. And no shade toward OP—it sounds like a cool project thoughtfully done, and a real improvement over the status quo for her relative!
Plus, maybe the customer would prefer to support a business that invests in and employs from the local community, even if it costs a little more. Or they see it as a quality signal. If I call a plumber who outsourced their reception to a call center to save a few bucks, I'm starting to think, "What else is he willing to do to save a few bucks?"
Would redirecting them to a website where they can go through a guided intake and get some confirmation of a callback? A well designed UI that allows them to ID their vehicle (make/model/year) and the issue they're having? HTML5 has decent speech to text out of the gate and they can just talk it out.
Obviously that process could happen purely via voice but I think there's not as much love for walking through forms in a phone call.
If Joe has a PC in the shop with a tailored UI, he could get pings of pending requests and when he comes up for air, update the intake (via voice to minimize greasy hands) and initiate a call back then and there?
Related - Monro Muffler Brake apparently switched to an offshore call center model to handle scheduling every single auto shop location. I hear nothing but complaints from both fellow customers as well as the shop managers themselves about their local phone number being ripped away from them and handed off to a call center to try to schedule vehicle service from thousands of miles away.
Yes - but as others have mentioned you wouldn't have good advertising material for your AI "readiness" courses.
More to the point - does this garage even have the time and space to service more vehicles? Generating a bunch of new low-value/low-loyalty customers takes up time and space and might have a lower return-per-hour while making it harder to retain higher value returning customers.
Additionally, as "luxury mechanic" (apparently specializing in BMW but servicing other makes) you'll need to appeal to "luxury drivers" and bolting on more crap that makes the experience worse is probably not the way to do that.
At the moment I'm pretty inclined to hang up if I feel I'm wasting my time with a robot.
But maybe soon we will not even realise we speak to a robot, given the current speed of ai development.
I wonder how that will erode trust in calls. I moved from cold emailing and cold LinkedIn to cold calling because of the massive amounts of ai spam I have to compete with. But maybe cold calling will die soon as well if the robots emerge.
I've been car shopping recently, and it took me a full week to realize that every dealership I'd talked to had an LLM with a fake name handling customer intake. I was 4 emails deep with one before I stopped to think about how plausible their near-instant response times were.
Is RAG even necessary here? Minimal information like a couple of price list with job times and opening hours should easily fit into any context window, right? It's not like he's dumping entire service manuals into the vector database here...
It most likely isn't, but it seems like this project was more for learning purposes than for anything else. In that case, why not go for the "production-ready", "highly scalable" solution? I sometimes do the same for my personal projects. I over-architect them not because it's necessary, but because I want to get my hands dirty and learn something new.
For voice conversations the issue can be more latency than filling the context. Without knowing the site is hard to say, but if he had multiple pages worth of text (dunno, type of cars, procedures, some emotional story, etc.) and a "slower" model, it might be worth it to use RAG to preselect fast a small portion and use LLM to refine the answer.
> This isn’t a generic chatbot. It’s a custom-built voice agent that answers his phone, knows his exact prices, his hours, his policies, and can collect a callback when it doesn’t know something.
When you get right down to it, most people have never had much reason outside school to exercise their writing skills all that much. They certainly aren't likely to have the time or inclination to develop their own taste or voice, or recognize the value in that. So when LLMs come along, why wouldn't the average person see an opportunity to write "well"? They probably don't see it as obviously generated (hence her polite disclaimer) or even as bad writing.
This is bad engineering. Step 1 should not be "start building the thing". The first thing you do (after understanding the customer's problem) is look for existing solutions already available and evaluate them.
I just called, chat bot is not even used yet. This is the worst tech demo ive seen on HN. New coders will be replaced by AI because they rather write articles and be streamers.
> This influencer was casually talking about how they learned to code and were now making a bajillion dollars. Two thoughts hit me instantly: 1.What is this "code" they’re talking about? and 2. How do I earn a bajillion-dollars?
I wish this person all the best, but most of this is incredibly out of alignment with how I wish programming / engineering culture would evolve.
I assume people are pissed off because its building something that people already hate and its a fully AI generated post that is jarring to read.
Nothing pisses people off faster than calling up and getting put on the line with a robot. Like if we're thinking about this problem and how to solve it we can look at other examples like a website with a booking form,call the mechanics cell directly, hire a receptionist or worst case outsource the receptionist to a booking agency.
The alternative here isn't talking to a person. The alternative is leaving a voicemail and praying for a callback. Likely, you don't even leave a voicemail and a match is not made.
Asking a business to hire a receptionist is probably a bit unlikely for small businesses in today's environment.
Voicemail alone doesn't have information about someone's schedule.
"I'd like to schedule a smog check tomorrow or Wednesday?" rather than leaving a message and hoping for a callback that you don't miss either (and have go to voice mail).
Consistency of interface. I've got the phone number of the mechanic I go to in my phone's address book... and the various medical services for appointments there.
If they were to have an app on their website, I wouldn't know because I don't use the webpage for that purpose - I call them.
Now, they've all got receptionists there that work full time and handle the appointments and take that first tier of service. These are larger places that have two receptionists working the full day (handling walkins, calling confirmations, and the other administrative tasks)... I don't think that an LLM (even with access to appointments) would do a better job than what they do (and certainly wouldn't be able to do the "ok, I showed up, now what do I do?")
However, I could see this for a small mechanic shop. When I lived in California, I went to what is now Shoreline Auto Care on El Camino and Shoreline - a small two bay mechanic... and that's not the type of place that has the business that can afford a full time receptionist.
So the question for a place like that... "what do you get for the phone calls you miss?"
That makes sense, but maybe the UX problem runs a bit deeper. Maybe contacts apps should surface websites higher in the UI for saved businesses?
Running a small website with a calendar booking link just sounds much easier, cheaper, less error prone, and a better UX than running a voice LLM that is connected to a RAG and calendar. And I still don't think the technology around us has been built to support small websites or small businesses.
You're probably correct in that (edit: re-reading this... no, I'm not an AI - some people write this way and I tend to prefer to defuse potential arguments where two people are arguing for the same thing in a thread). Though I would think of the voice LLM system more as a smart answering machine rather than a complete replacement of calling the shop. The normal (preferred) course would be for one of the human staff there to pick up the phone... say before the 5th ring. On the 7th ring, it goes to voicemail... or to the voice LLM augmented voicemail.
If the LLM augmented voicemail is not much more than the business voicemail service that such places have now, is it enough value add?
That also implies other things - such as the capability to integrate with the calendar and appointment system which I'm still in the very hesitant side, but it could be an interesting service add on if it was properly limited.
If they can make the AI ajudicate the knowledge of the caller, I'm more than all for it.
"Hmm, this user seems to really understand network topology, better get him over to engineering"
vs.
"Hmm, the user doesn't know the difference between their router and their modem, I should help them identify the router then walk them through a power cycle".
Just how much effort even went into this? The project is LLM generated, the blog post is LLM generated. It produced something that is really annoying to deal with as a consumer. The last thing I want to talk with when calling a boutique garage is some AI receptionist.
Everything someone does is to give them something in return. Do you think HN would exist if not for the benefits of YC? Doesn't mean the blog post isn't interesting or helpful. Perhaps you dismiss the post because of your bias?
The poster has built something that, while technically interesting, is profoundly annoying as a user and deserves to be backlashed to prevent more of this kind of stuff to be built
Definitely very interesting to me too.
It was nice to see the breakdown of what technology was used and for what. The whole breakdown makes me believe I could build something like this too
"hundreds of calls per week" because the mechanic is under the hood every day seems a little off. Hundreds seems way too excessive. Perhaps an exaggeration to highlight the problem's seriousness?
With that kind of volume, I think even before AI could have helped, why not hire some staff and potentially even a receptionist. Given the volume, this seems like an easy choice.
Our local air conditioning/heating/plumbing place started routing their frontline answering service to an AI call service. It has an odd uncanny valley feeling to it that I simply don't trust. I chased down other points of contact until I got ahold of a person instead. I'd trust a phone tree with a voicemail box more.
Place I order takeout from using an AI assistant or tries to force you to order online. Neither is optimal when I'm trying to just order some takeout while I'm driving home from work.
But if you say "talk to a manager" it'll still force a human to answer, which is the only thing I ever do.
I think the biggest thing is to not give it access to anything like a shell (obviously), limit the call length, and give it a hangup command.
Then you tell it to just not answer off the wall questions etc. and if you are using a good model it will resist casual attempts.
I don't see being able to ask nonsense questions as being a big deal for an average small business. But you could put a guardrail model in front to make it a lot harder if it was worth it.
in general these types of attacks are still difficult to solve, because there are a lot of different ways they can be formulated. llm based security is still and unknown, but mostly i have seen people using intermediary steps to parse question intent and return canned responses if the question seems outside the intended modality.
I'm not part of the target market but I hate talking about technical and financial things on the telephone even to a human being. I much prefer being able to put my request in writing and get a written response plus a phone call from someone who has already been able to evaluate my request and pick holes in it and advise me what to do next.
That way there are fewer misunderstandings. This is how arranging servicing with Tesla works (at least in Norway and the UK). I use the app to describe the problem, add photographs if i think they would help. Then if it clear wat is to be done the app will notify me that the estimate is ready for approval, otherwise I'll get a message in the app or a phone call or both.
Reading this thread has me wondering if a smarter voicemail inbox system would be a viable and useful alternative.
Something like leave a voicemail and get a ticket created in the system to log the call for triage once the owner's hands are free.
The system could be configured to text a link to an intake form or quote calculator or calendly or whatever if intent is successfully detected.
I wouldn't mind this as a caller because I'd hear a typical phone tree setup, have a callback option, __and__ have a digital action I can take without being annoyed by a fake receptionist.
I imagine a certain type of business owner would appreciate the more streamlined workflow, plus having more control without the AI risks.
In the UK all of my local garages miss calls. If you go down there it is easy to see why, they are booked solid and have people turning up out-of- the-blue with emergency work. There is no use for an agent. If you want to get your car fixed you have to work around them.
In the article the person claims their brother misses a lot of calls because they are too busy to take them. If they are too busy to take calls, how are they going to fit more work in?
Then there is the luxury element, luxury services answer with humans. The end.
> When a caller asks something that isn’t in the knowledge base, the AI doesn’t guess.
I've seen a number of instances of this type of thing in wild, and under the hood it's usually some prompt that asks the llm to gauge confidence in its own answer. And from my admittedly naive understanding of how this all works, this seems extremely unlikely to be accurate. But I'm curious if that's still the case or if I'm operating under pre-2026 information?
If you didn't have a sibling to do it for you free/cheap, I wonder how many months of a human receptionist (or service) the fee to build (and maintain) such a thing would cover.
It's also just easier. When I needed a service for my car (and I didn't already have an established shop where to take it), I just wrote what I was looking for once and emailed the same thing to multiple different places at once.
If I had to call four different places and spend five minutes on the phone with each shop, that'd eat up my entire lunch time.
> Wired up Claude for response generation — The retrieved documents get passed as context to Anthropic Claude (claude-sonnet-4-6) along with a strict system prompt: answer only from the knowledge base, keep responses short and conversational, and if you don’t know — say so and offer to take a message. No hallucinations allowed.
Claude will hallucinate anyway, sometimes.
I don't think there's any way around this other than a cli or MCP that says "press the 'play prerecorded .WAV file button that says the brake repair service info and prices.'"
No idea what `luxury` is doing here, but if I get an LLM receptionist, that ain't it.
This isn't to disparage the project - I think this sort of usage will become very common and a decent standard that produces good consumer surplus in terms of reduced costs etc. Especially impressive is that it's a DIY family-first implementation that seems to be working. It's great hacker work.
But be warned it will erode - in general - the luxury previously associated with your brand, and also turn some customers away entirely.
In America the normal term is "European", not "luxury".
It would be somewhat odd to specialize in both American and European luxury cars. It'd be significantly less odd to service a RR and a BMW 3er next to each other.
The actual company’s website says European, not luxury. My guess is that the OP wasn’t familiar with this distinction and just figured luxury means the same thing (the car shop is his brother’s as per the link.)
Admittedly I missed this distinction, but does the point still stand?
A BMW owner has fussier standards (on average) than a Toyota owner. The 'higher touch' a service you're trying to provide, the less welcome these interventions will be. If there's a distinction between a normal-car garage and a luxury-car garage, this probably comes down to some sort of licensing or certification from those luxury brands. Seems plausible to me that luxury brand X could stipulate things like availability of human contact points.
Re: not being a car mechanic, it's true, but I'll have you know that I replaced my own blower motor a few months ago :)
This isn’t accurate. Lots of types of people own older used European/luxury cars, it’s not just a rich people thing. Used BMWs especially aren’t that expensive compared to new cars.
This garage is for those older cars and has no connection to the actual manufacturers, so there is no licensing required.
Sure and just to add a funny anecdote here: a family member of mine used to own a 1980s Jaguar. Beautiful car and he probably paid $5,000 for it, but it had issues pretty much every month. His reasoning for keeping it was that the monthly repair costs were roughly equivalent to what a new car payment would be.
I agree with you on the dealership dynamics though.
> No idea what `luxury` is doing here, but if I get an LLM receptionist, that ain't it.
Bingo.
You can't get away with AI slop in a service oriented for wealthy customers.
The day my dealership starts answering me with AI they lose a customer 100%.
This solution screams "built by a tech bro with no idea about economics and marketing" which is the VC playbook into modernizing (and failing) businesses they don't understand.
> This solution screams "built by a tech bro with no idea about economics and marketing" which is the VC playbook into modernizing (and failing) businesses they don't understand.
I think you need to be better at self reflection. A tech bro who read a blog post and immediately accused the author of being "a tech bro with no idea about economics and marketing", and assumed that they didn't understand the business they built a software for.
As for AI for luxury services, you didn't look hard enough. See for example discussion of what Langham Hotel Group is doing with AI. Granted, nothing earth shattering:
You are right, but this also isn't a luxury mechanic shop. A luxury mechanic shop would be a place that services and customizes Bentleys, RRs, vintage Ferraris and similar. And to your point, the clientele there will be extremely unimpressed if they are asked to speak with an AI. A place like that is as much about being pampered by staff as about the workmanship.
OP's brother is by all accounts running a successful boutique workshop, but the various luxury annotations were completely unnecessary and just detract from the actual project. If they do want to lean into the luxury segment, being cheap with AI receptionists is not the way to go. They need to hire actual staff who has experience with HNW individuals.
Our local Subaru dealership has an option to use an AI assistant when you call to set up an appointment. I tried it, it worked perfectly, better than a human, honestly. Likewise our local Taco Bell is uses AI ordering and it works great as well. I'm sure they have their issues, but I'm losing nothing by not talking to a human in this situation, and there's always a human available if I need one.
I think the idea and write up is neat, but I question if the brother ever thought of, I don’t know, hiring a receptionist so he wasn’t losing “thousands of dollars per month”? Maybe I’m oversimplifying the problem.
The other aspect of this I have questions about is the price quoting. Knowing the standard price list makes sense, but how can you trust that a caller knows what they need without looking at their car? Wouldn’t this likely result in quotes for work that may or may not even be needed?
Fair warning to those out there: I've had terrible experiences with AI receptionists so far, to the point that I refuse to do business with anyone who uses them.
I went through hell on a home remodel project 6 months ago around this stuff. I got a quote from a reputable plumber and went to schedule the rough-in session. An AI receptionist answered, got confused during the scheduling flow and could not understand my address, asking me to repeat it over and over. And it couldn't forward to me to human.
If I'm paying you tens of thousands of dollars for remodeling work, I damn well better be able to get in touch with you. I found a different contractor and never looked back.
> "and he’s losing thousands of dollars per month because he misses hundreds of calls per week. He’s under the hood all day. The phone rings, he can’t answer, the customer hangs up and calls someone else"
I'm not familiar with american pay amounts, what's the wages for a receptionist like? If you just hire one to make sure you don't lose thousands of dollars a month in jobs, will you still be making a profit?
I build software for contractors (plumbers, electricians, HVAC repair, etc) and they're some of the fastest adopters of these systems. I believe YC has even invested in a few.
Regarding the AI receptionists, from the calls I've listened to, there's still a bit of the uncanny valley/overlapping speech issues that I'm unsure are ever fixable just due to latency.
But for low margin businesses like contracting and (I imagine) auto repair where labor is your most expensive cost, these owners are doing anything they can to reduce their overhead.
I recently fired a plumber I was trying to contract for a five figure remodel job because his AI receptionist couldn't understand my address and therefore could not schedule the appointment. After that experience, I will not use a contractor that I cannot personally get in touch with until these systems improve demonstrably.
I built something similar and learned a lot about how useful a “receptionist” (advisor) is vs something that just immediately sends the user to the shop asap
The foundational product truth is you win business by saying “oh you’re car is broken, come in right now” then an actual tech or manager does the sale
My mechanic has had an earpiece thing. After three rings it rings in his ear. Few customers realize the voice booking thier appointment is often elbow-deep in an engine.
He told me once that he would never have a dedicated receptionist. He has his mechanics rotate between the shop and the desk. They have the skills to give advice and prices over the phone, sometims ordering parts before the customer ever arrives.
Honestly great work, but this is very much something where the results matter more than the product. It ends without a single comment about whether it worked in Production.
How are they measuring the success rate? It seems like a project like this is a great time to dive into the problem and define the parameters of success. If only to inform how you design the ai’s presentation of the shop. Ie. how quickly does it get customer’s profile and discover their issue.
Thinking about my experiences with mechanics shops—with the exception of dealerships and larger operations—if you’re talking to a principal, the conversation is brief. It’s possible customers will respond positively if the bot is effective for scheduling and if the price communicated by phone, and the final price are somehow aligned to expectations.
They admit a raw LLM would be dangerous and then proceed to use RAG... How is this any better? You cannot allow an LLM to generate the final outbound message if you are liable for what it says.
LLM to understand the question? Yes. Generate SQL maybe with Embeddings to look up answers? Yes. Generate the final response? No.
Think about scaling this as you're building, your brother is just your first customer, make sure your service works with any number of customers out of the gate. I should be able to sign up for your service, point it at my website to ingest all my information, and have it ready to go.
This felt oddly ai-authored, like the kind of “brain dump then ask ChatGPT to sort it into a post”. Probably because of too many bullet points and bold emphasis
It’s a luxury to hire a human… but needed for these type of high value customers… just have the receptionist do other tasks a human can do while between calls… a clean shop is a functional shop ;)
If it’s anything like talking to ChatGPT via voice they’d definitely notice. And if it has anything like the failure modes it does, the OP’s brother is going to eat into a lot of the cost savings he’d get (vs using a human receptionist or even an outsourced receptionist) dealing with fires like the AI said my car would absolutely be done today.
A bunch of comments around the theme of "Is it worth it for _this_ use case?" misses the point of "Which of these techniques/lessons from the blog can I use for _my_ use case". I found the blog post a good starting point for some agentic stuff I want to do for my use case. Good on you for experimenting and good luck!
Thanks for sharing the journey. What did you do in terms of security for the receptionist? I suspect someone can trick the agent through things like prompt injection.
Ignore the expected negativity, many here have not used the latest gen of voice agents in development. Even if used as a router , prefer that to waiting to get through
I was agreeing with all the nay-saying comments, but yours made me see the idea as good. I guess the word "luxury" ruined it for OP.
But a speech-to-text and text-to-speech system that I know is "understanding" me would be great rather than waiting music. The shop could even sell it as "As a small shop, most of our employees are busy fixing cars, so we are using AI to help with calls" (Although then people who are anxious about AI stealing jobs might hang up). The robot can ask me what I need, and then say "So for [this service], the price would be..." (to tell the caller what it has understood).
If the AI can even look at gaps in the shop's schedule and set an appointment time, the customer might even be happy that they just spent a minute on the phone instead of 10+...
I would rather just be sent to a regular old answering machine. Dealing with an AI is dehumanizing. In almost every single case where I actually need to call a place, its because I need to talk to them about something an automated system like booking an appointment, can't handle.
I know it's intended to be dismissive, but I would appreciate the choice.
Even if the new model that came out last week totally fixed all the problems this time for real, most people's experience with chatbots is that they are prone to misunderstanding or making false statements. "Hallucinations"
I have yet to experience any degree of confidence in any output from an LLM, so I'd rather leave the message. I don't know how common this point of view is.
brutal market for lemons: the last 100 times they heard robovoice on the phone they had a terrible experience, and any money you spend fixing this is wasted because the customer cant tell your robovoice is actually honest and capable of making commitments because they all sound perfectly confident and correct even the ones who know nothing and will promise anything
he hard part of voice AI agents is not building the first demo. It is handling the cases your training data did not cover. We run multi-agent systems daily and the pattern is always the same. Happy path works great on day one, then edge cases pile up for months. Having a clear escalation path to a human like you did is the right call
Just this morning, going in for my regular cleaning at the dental office, I was not greeted by a receptionist, rather by some screen which allowed me to "check myself in"... It broke me. I am done with overpaying any business which charges premium prices and lacks the decency of not making me talk to a retarded machine.
I walked out, will gladly pay the invoice (48 hour cancellation policy!) and never go there again.
The responses here remind me how much of a bubble we are in on HN. "I hang up when I realize I am talking to a bot", "I would rather email". I think a lot of non-tech-savvy people would rather not send an email or realize they are talking to a bot.
That made me laugh a bit as well. Definitely want to see some rigorous testing on that, I'd expect that on longer calls tha caller can make the ai say basically anything.
I hate chatbot for situations like this but I get the reasons here. That said, I was hoping to get info on how it actually performed - nothing. There is nothing to suggest there is a clear metric for success and no hint of one either.
It’s just the euphoria of building something, but zilch about impact.
I admire what you have done, but for a luxury experience, I do not want to talk to an AI that just tells me what is already on the website. If I have gotten to the point where I am calling you, its because I couldn’t find an answer to my question on the website in the first place.
I think we can solve this as a society by just making it clear that if you put an AI between you and your customers, you are absolutely bound by anything it offers them.
The law already covers this kind of thing using the reasonable person standard.
Walmart is bound by anything an employee says that a reasonable person would believe that employee has the authority to offer.
So if an employee tells you that you can have half off the service if it isn’t done today, probably bound by it. If they tell you the owner will give you a handjob probably not.
I used to work as a service advisor - or as the article says, receptionist. This system will not work as described for several reasons.
1. Unless you have a recent job that matches the exact same repair/service, you have incorrectly estimated the cost of the repair. In some states, this matters a lot and will cost the shop money. Unless your LLM only quotes for labor in sane amounts for diagnostic and nothing else, you’re only adding noise. This is a disservice to the client and the shop owner. The client now has an inaccurate quote for work and the shop will get a reputation for being inaccurate in quoting work.
2. Let’s say that you manage to get the exact same job twice. Your machine now needs to source parts. Parts may have been in stock yesterday. The might be out of stock now. If they are in stock, you need to retotal the price since prices are dynamic. Did you teach the agent how to source parts? What rules does it have for sourcing used parts?
3. New jobs can’t be quoted. Even if you taught the machine how to calculate book time and margins, it still has to find the right parts. If your shop does high end work, you know how much of a pain in the ass this is. Also remember that some work requires nonobvious parts - like fluids if you need to remove a part in the way of your goal.
4. The only area I see this being useful in is pickup. The shop can mark a car as done and the LLM can call to inform the client that they can come at a preset, unchanging time to get the vehicle. If the vehicle is staying overnight, the LLM can call with a progress update.
Finally, I’d like to note that this sort of dev work goes beyond hubris. It’s dangerous. The more we assume we know without verifying, the greater the risk. In this case, the dev is risking someone else’s livelihood.
I am certainly not an expert but I agree a lot with your sentiment about the hubris - but the problem as presented in the article makes no sense to me.
If you see a value need for a receptionist, and you suspect that it is costing you thousands of dollars, wouldn't a normal response be, "I should think about hiring someone," rather than turning to an unproven, untested solution like this and leaving your business at the hands of how correct it is? I just cannot understand this line of thinking at all, reaching for a tool that would probably do a worse job than a human would do. Is it not wanting to hire? Not wanting to manage? Hype cycle? Where does this urge come from?
To take this further, if the focus really is the "luxury" part of the market, how do they expect this sort of response to go down well with customers?!
If someone is interested in paying luxury size fees, do they really want some cobbled together chatbot? I say this as an advocate for (high quality) chatbots for various practical needs, but it just seems like it is misunderstanding the customers (or maybe luxury is a bit of a loose term new in the area this mechanic works in?)
Using AI tells me you don't care about the quality of your service.
Or maybe customer appetite can be markedly different depending on context.
These customers own expensive cars - or at least, cars that were expensive when they were new. The car might now be ten years old or more, and the owner bought it used. They want a prestige marque, but the customer does not have the money to buy a new prestige car. So they are looking to save on service.
All the time I see cars with expensive names - BMW, Mercedes Benz - broken down on the side of the road, while old Hondas and Toyotas keep cruising by. Those are the customers for this shop: they spent all their money buying an expensive used car, and now they can't afford to maintain it and fix looming problems; meanwhile the Toyota or Hyundai driver gets maintenance and maybe even takes it to the dealer for it.
A mechanic like this can't afford to hire someone to answer the phone. Such a person is expensive, and these customers want rock-bottom prices despite the car being expensive. So a chatbot is good enough and better than nothing.
The most trustworthy mechanic I used in England had an appointment book pretty much full for four months in advance. He didn't answer the phone, didn't have a computer, just a desk diary. If you wanted him to work on your car you turned up at his workshop and spoke to him. If you were willing to wait until he'd finished whatever thing he was doing he'd take a quick look at your car and suggest a course of action. And despite his full order book if something looked urgent enough and small enough he'd fit you in quite quickly.
He charged reasonable prices, but definitely not rock bottom. He had no need to compete with the bottom feeders because every customer acted as his public relations agent.
How would a chatbot help?
> Where does this urge come from?
Business owners tend to resent having to rely on and pay their workers.
Many of them believe people should line up and volunteer/be forced to work at their companies for free, the fact that they have to pay them is an insult.
They need workers, but workers are not worthy of being needed by them, or paid, so they look for any out at all.
The word you’re looking for is greed. These systems are greed enablers. The narrative used to pump them plays on greed. And so on.
Hiring a person for the job is 3000$ per month? Great let’s try to do this with 500$ and a tangle of vibecoded toothpick bridges! For a luxury service with generous margins this is a failure-prone mentality.
They'd still try to replace workers, even if their attempted route of automation cost them more than hiring employees would, because of their resentment towards them
Aside from a cost? It's also managing the actual human being, and making sure they have enough work. If the place has 5-10 calls a day, then it's pointless to hire receptionist that will do nothing for 1 hour, and then get 2 minutes chat. It used to be pointless to build software to do that, but since claude code it's cheap enough to make sense.
receptionist as a service has been a thing for like... forever. You are never going to solve the problem of accurately estimating and quoting with AI or an answering service, so pay for someone to answer the phone and take down the details; have a mechanic or trained service rep review and estimate. Cheap code that doesn't solve the problem is not cheap.
Couldn't an ai take down the details and pass it to a mechanic or trained service rep?
Yes, of course. The bot can request information and the customer can provide it if they feel like it, and then someone qualified can call them back when they have their hands free.
But there's no bot, per se, needed at all. An answering machine from 1993 can do this same information-gathering job. :)
I can see a useful simple case of structuring a good answering system and then using AI to do STT then using Claude to structure the callback data
Good point.
So update the device from 1993's new-fangled digital answering machine to 2009's Google Voice, and have it do the transcription from voicemail to text.
Someone will still have to call Bill back about his Honda (which is actually the Kia he bought for his daughter -- Bill is not a very technical guy these days[1] and he confuses such concepts regularly) in order to get any trading of money for services done.
It doesn't take an LLM to get there, and Bill would probably prefer to avoid being frustrated by the bot's insistent nature.
[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47356166
Look, you‘re kicking an open door. I think LLMs applied like this are just a layer of complexity that os mostly replacing lower level programming solutions that could do the same thing
The transcription + callback loop is honestly underrated. Most of the value here is just capturing intent accurately ("Honda" vs "Kia" aside) so the mechanic can prioritize callbacks. A dumb voicemail-to-text pipeline handles that fine. The LLM layer adds complexity without solving the actual bottleneck, which is someone qualified picking up the phone.
You nailed it.
But I'm not sure that a bot can be trusted to make good decisions about priority, either. So even if it makes good decisions based on context (which it can increasingly-often do, but does not always do), it lacks the context that is necessary to form the basis of good decisions.
Suppose a message comes into the box with this form: "This is Wendy, can you call me? My car is making that noise again."
The bot might deprioritize that call because it lacks actionable contextual information. "My job as a bot is to get more jobs into the shop. This call does not have enough data to do that, so I'll shove to the bottom of list of callbacks behind more-actionable jobs."
But the mechanic? The mechanic knows Wendy's Ford very well, and he also knows Wendy. She's a been a good customer for over a decade. The mechanic also knows the noise, and that Wendy has 3 little kids and that she's vacationing 900 miles away on a road trip with those kids in that Ford. The context is all there inside of the mechanic's brain to combine and mean that this might be the highest-priority call he gets all week.
Wendy may not have actively relayed any urgency in her message, but the urgency is real and she needs called back right away. She needs answers about what to do (keep driving and look into it when she gets back? pull over immediately and get a tow to a decent local shop? maybe she even needs help finding such a shop?) pretty much immediately. Not because it means more business today, but because it means more business for years.
The mechanic can spot this from a list of transcripts in an instant and give her a ring back Right Now. The bot is NFG at this.
The addition of the bot only adds noise to the process, and that noise only works to Wendy's detriment. When the bot adds detrimental noise to Wendy's situation, it also adds detriment to the shop's longevity.
The presence of the bot -- even as a prioritizing sorting mechanism -- asymptotically shifts the state from an excellent shop that knows their customers very well to a bot-driven customer-averse hellscape.
(And no, the answer isn't to make the bot into an all-knowing oracle that actively gets fed all context. The documentation burden would be more expensive, time-wise (and thus money-wise) than hiring a competent human receptionist who answers the phone, handles the front door traffic, and absorbs context from their surroundings. A person who chatted with Wendy last Thursday right before she left for her trip is always going to be superior to a bot.)
If someone put on their website and voicemail that they were available for calls only from 8-10am (for example), or that they would return my call at that time, I'd make a point to call them then. It's reasonable that people are busy too.
Isn't this the fundamental problem of all AI chatbots? If the problem is costing thousands of dollars (a week?), why not hire a person?
If it's not costing thousands of dollars, why would I hire a software engineer to build this for me.
Because the capital owning class in America commonly has an aversion to labor.
Labor is other humans and all their social hierarchy monkey brain bullshit activates in a way that a machine doesn’t. That’s why you’ll see companies spending equivalent or even slightly more money for a tool to do a job over a human being.
The US ain't special. And in fact they are more likely to use more labour.
Have a look at US Walmart vs German Aldi for how that looks like.
Walmart employs this amount of workers only because it is subsided by food stamps and other government assistance. The minute they were forced to actually pay for the labor they employ would fire a lot of people
https://old.reddit.com/r/IsItBullshit/comments/1eftcuc/isitb...
Actually a lot of US companies rely on this
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2026/mar/04/workers-med...
You are suggesting that if the government gives you a tax break, your boss would lower your salary? Why does your boss wait for the tax break or handout and doesn't just lower your salary now?
Also what's your counterfactual here? If Walmart fired their employees tomorrow and replaced them with robots, those ex-employees would magically no longer need food stamps nor government assistance? (Or more realistically: Walmart could pivot to the Aldi model of labour and replace many low intensity jobs with fewer higher intensity jobs. For the affected workers, the outcome is the same.)
If those ex-workers don't magically get off government assistance, if Walmart is out of the picture, in what sense is Walmart to blame for their poverty?
Conversely: if Walmart laying off these workers would magically improve their welfare, why do these workers wait for Walmart to lay them off?
> Walmart could pivot to the Aldi model of labour and replace many low intensity jobs with fewer higher intensity jobs.
Yes, this is the expected change.
> For the affected workers, the outcome is the same.
No? There are two classes of affected workers:
1. Workers who have been converted to full-time with benefits. These workers benefit from the change.
2. Workers who lose their jobs. These workers are worse off.
Your argument ignores class 1.
I don't think we'll get anywhere debating the relative merits of the tradeoff of those two groups, but I personally prefer the existence of class 1. At least with that class there are some winners.
There's practically no (1). It's a different class of workers, of people than who Walmart currently employs at low intensity and low pay.
People who prefer a higher intensity, higher paying job than the bottom rung at Walmart can already get that kind of job today. They don't need to wait for Walmart to fire everyone else.
Walmart has some of these jobs already, probably. But Aldi and other companies exist. The whole Jeff Bezo's workout at Amazon Warehouses falls in a similar category too: Amazon pays pretty well for the sector and requires no prior experience, but they expect you to stay on your feed throughout.
> Walmart employs this amount of workers only because it is subsided by food stamps
And then those food stamps are used at Walmart, its a win win for Walmart and Walmart. No other country gives their poor food stamps instead of money, I wonder why?
Central Europeans tried it a few decades back. They do not want to go there again.
> No other country gives their poor food stamps instead of money, I wonder why?
Are you sure about that?
When AI is your hammer, everything looks like a nail.
I'm projecting, but I think you're right. Not wanting to manage is probably a large driver. I can imagine that if you've dealt with messy humans before, that a robot receptionist that's not going to show up late, call out when hungover, need an advance for a family member's surgery and then quit, is quite attractive.
Until the robot breaks for reasons unknown and you have to pay for expensive engineering time to fix it. Surprise, since the engineer vibe coded the whole thing, he also has no idea how to fix it except to get the AI to try.
> If you see a value need for a receptionist, and you suspect that it is costing you thousands of dollars, wouldn't a normal response be, "I should think about hiring someone," [...]
If you only have thousands of dollars is savings from the move, hiring someone might be too expensive.
The cost of a few mistakes now and then is cheaper than hiring a full time receptionist and even paying their healthcare.
You'd be surprised how many businesses don't answer their phone or chose not to answer based on who is calling.
From the post it's clear that the shop has a set schedule of services and prices that the bot is pulling from. All the things you're saying are true for a shop that needs to custom quote each job but do not apply to the situation as presented.
It's clear that the author interpreted the data that way, yes.
And perhaps the shop actually charges the same for brakes whether it is an Ford F150 or a Toyota Corolla.
But that seems very unlikely to me. While they're both very common vehicles, they are also very different and the parts have substantially different costs associated with them.
From working in such a place I can also tell you the price depends on who is asking.
Right it's almost like the preferred solution – since the guy is the source of knowledge, but is under the hood – would be just installing a phone with a loud speaker in a garage that he could answer without using his hands.
He knows the prices and the parts, there isn't enough calls to hire a receptionist, and voice controlled systems are quite easy to make. If you use local voice recognition model, you could even mention neural networks in a write up, it's a win-win
And it's quite cheaper too, I'd estimate around 200$-300$ for a room. Most of it for a good microphone.
There's a lot of stupid keyboard punching that you need to do to create a proper quote. You can't do that from under a car.
Someone comes in for a timing belt on a car that needs timing belts. Ok, you've got the parts and labor on the belt itself, those are easy to just look up from a table. But, do you just replace the belt, replace other things related to it as well, or perhaps even go above and beyond and proactively do a water pump or something while you're in there. That's gonna depend on the relative cost/labor differences of those, the customer's intentions, the value of the car, etc.
What you really need is someone to answer the phone, pull all that info and then say "hey Jim there's some guy on the phone who needs X, the options are" and then run down all the reasonable combinations and let the tech exercise judgement. This is basically what the service writer does but ideally they get good and don't need to bother the tech for "minor" judgement stuff.
And that's all assuming that this is a cookie cutter job.
> Finally, I’d like to note that this sort of dev work goes beyond hubris. It’s dangerous. The more we assume we know without verifying, the greater the risk. In this case, the dev is risking someone else’s livelihood.
I think this is a bit of an overstatement. The dev states it’s her brother’s business, and one can assume he’s asked her to help him out.
Getting the service to be 100% perfect is of course a near impossible challenge, but that’s most likely not the business owner’s concern — they simply want a way to avoid totally losing business. If the service can convert even 10% of customers with a rough quote and timeline it’s most likely useful.
High end shops live off reputation alone. Usually they’re started by a very skilled mechanic who does racing or some other specialty automotive hobby.
The exit plan for these guys is usually to sell the shop. Most buyers are usually skilled white collar workers looking for a new hobby. The shop folds after that because they no longer have the same connections to the specialty community.
You can get business outside of the specialty auto scene. In fact, it’s required since that’s what actually makes money. Google reviews and word of mouth are king here.
So do you remove the owner from the customer experience? I wouldn’t. But if you are going to do that, then, understanding the risk is important.
The shop can mark a car as done and the LLM can call to inform the client that they can come at a preset, unchanging time to get the vehicle. If the vehicle is staying overnight, the LLM can call with a progress update.
This doesn't need an LLM. It can be and has already been done for many years with a simple TTS.
What, you don't want your notification system to slightly change its phrasing and voice each time it's triggered? It's a steal at only 10x the cost.
The solution is to have the quote manually prepared, entered into the system of record, and then automate the outbound phone call to let the customer know, and agree to the work based on the accurate quote. That's the savings.
So you've saved 30 seconds per customer for a total of 3-10 customers calling per day.
It seems to me that calling the customer to get them to agree on a quote is the most important contact?
It’s like telling a salesman to just enter data into a CRM and trust their livelihood to an AI closer. See how that goes over.
That call is really important. “Do I really need to spend all this right now? Can I just get by with x instead of x,y,z?”
For now I’m not sure it will be efficient to provide models enough context, for one thing, to do it reliably.
One of my specialties is creating call centers using Amazon Connect. I agree with everything you said. I wouldn’t let an LLM go near doing a quote or ordering parts.
Where do they shine?
Intent recognition and tool calling
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47241412
And well grounded RAG.
I share your skepticism but it does seem like the author addressed 1 and 3:
> When a caller asks something that isn’t in the knowledge base, the AI doesn’t guess. It tells the caller it doesn’t have that information, asks for their name and a good callback number, and saves that to MongoDB. Dane gets a list of callbacks to return — no lost leads.
> The escalation path is not an edge case — it’s a core feature.
I haven't been a service advisor before, but if it's anything like working the phones at other retailers, you get a lot of the same questions over and over again, and a bot could certainly answer those things correctly.
> The phone rings, he can’t answer, the customer hangs up and calls someone else. That’s a lost job — sometimes a $450 brake service, sometimes a $2,000 engine repair — just gone because no one picked up.
Sure, that's a problem, but...
> Dane gets a list of callbacks to return — no lost leads.
Yeah. So. I'm still going to hang up, phone somewhere else, and you get no business. I'm also doubly annoyed because not only did you waste my time speaking to a computer, it couldn't answer the question so I'm now worse off than if you'd ignored the call.
Yeah - this scenario presupposes that if I need my car fixed I'm going to wait for you to give me a call back, rather than continue working down my list.
The AI doesn’t have to solve every problem to solve some problems. If it can answer 10% of questions, isn’t that 10% better than having all of them go to voicemail unanswered?
I mean... Maybe?
The data the bot has to work with is stated to already be available the website. Therefore, I'd never call on the phone to find those answers -- but those are the only answers the bot has to offer.
The only reason I'd ever call is for answers that the website (and therefore, the bot) does not provide. Calling on the phone and getting a bot that insists on giving me data that I already have would only serve to waste my time and frustrate me.
It would probably frustrate me enough to hang up and call a different shop immediately, and name-and-shame the place.
I know how to Google shit. By the time I start dialing telephone numbers, I've already Googled this shit.
When I call a local shop I want to talk to someone at that local shop (or at very least, their voicemail) -- not a regurgitating bot.
But, again, that's just me.
---
So I'm imagining my dad, who's in his mid-70s and has never Googled a single thing in his entire life. At least superficially, he sounds like an ideal candidate that can be helped with this automated receptionist.
Except: When he calls the shop and has to talk to the bot instead of a person or their voicemail, he's also definitely hanging up immediately and calling the next place on his list. This doesn't help him at all, nor does it help the shop.
---
For the shop, the cost of frustrated people who vent to their friends about the experience may very well be higher the cost of not always being available to answer the phone.
There is no way to ensure that the AI doesn't guess. You can do all the prompting and RAG you want but sometimes it's just going to make shit up and ignore instructions
> It's not X — it's Y.
The "author" sure did...
It might be the same calls if you work at a shop that only works on one model year vehicle doing a set of services. Note that services are not repairs.
Otherwise, it’s all different.
I think the post is implicitly assuming a much narrower scope than "full service advisor" but it doesn't state that clearly
Honest estimates are probably fine.
If you are already drowning in work, make everything expensive enough to cover the errors. You always have some % chance to lose money with each customer. If the estimate is to high one can give a discount afterwards.
Could play the call on the speaker and decide if it is worth dropping your tools and walking to the phone. Those 10-20 daily marketeers are definitely not it.
> Finally, I’d like to note that this sort of dev work goes beyond hubris. It’s dangerous. The more we assume we know without verifying, the greater the risk. In this case, the dev is risking someone else’s livelihood.
Every single phone call to a business will be having this in the back office within 5 to 10 years.
Couldn't you blast through all of that with some kind of warning like: "All labor and part prices are estimates, for exact pricing leave your name and number and we will get back to you".
Yes. However, an estimate is not a guess.
From the Washington state attorney general’s website:
“ Estimate: You are entitled to a written price estimate for the repairs you have authorized before the work is performed, only if you deal face-to-face with the facility and the work is expected to cost more than $100. Once you receive an estimate, the facility may not charge you more than 10% above the estimated costs without your prior approval.
The estimate includes, among other things: the odometer reading; a description of the problem or the specific repair requested; choice of alternatives for the customer; the estimated cost; labor and parts necessary for the specific diagnosis/repair requested”
So the LLM builds an estimate. Maybe it’s under 10% difference when the customer walks through the door.
When it’s not, there’s a big problem. Yes, this is still before work has begun, but now you’ve wasted the customers time. And potentially wasted their money if the vehicle was towed in.
I didn't mean "estimate" in some technical/legal sense, replace the word with "our best guess" or whatever terminology is used by the 1000s of companies that are using LLMs but not being held legally responsible for what they say.
> “ Estimate: You are entitled to a written price estimate for the repairs you have authorized before the work is performed, only if you deal face-to-face with the facility and the work is expected to cost more than $100. Once you receive an estimate, the facility may not charge you more than 10% above the estimated costs without your prior approval.
I don't see how "estimates" given over the phone by the LLM and "estimate" as mentioned in this quote refers to the same thing, for the legal purpose of this statement. This would be strictly before repairs have been authorized, and it's obviously not a written estimate. If the client requests a written estimate, it would have to come at a later time after the human mechanic reviews related costs (like specialty parts availability/ship times), or the client bringing the machine in for physical inspection by the mechanic.
From my understanding of the article, it doesn't sound like the LLM is built to fully circumvent a customer phone call by the owner/mechanic before approving a job request unmanned: It's simply to not let go of a client lead because there was no one available to answer the phone, without needing to hire a full-time phone receptionist.
It seems highly unlikely a customer is towing their vehicle in without talking to the mechanic directly first, who now has some context and the ability to sift nonsense requests from realistic ones from the logs before calling or writing to the customer on their own time with all the expert nuance necessary.
I didn’t say it was a written estimate. I said the opposite.
Do you know how towing a car into this particular shop works? If so, please enlighten me.
In most shops, mechanics do not talk to customers. Mechanics get paid to work on vehicles - not talk on phones.
Regardless, the potential for sticker shock exists if the LLM and the mechanic disagree on pricing. You can and will lose customers due to this. I’ve seen it happen. That’s why service advisors are trained to only quote for diagnostics over the phone.
Finally, in the sales training we got, we were taught to not compete on price. This rule doubly applies to a high end shop. They make their money by competing on quality and timeliness. Adding the LLM to the equation compromises both of those.
Have your estimate be off by enough to annoy me a time or two and you'll also blast through my continuing to be a customer.
[dead]
Realistically, every single mechanic has Google reviews that say “they said it would be $C but it was $D” and so on. You’re claiming a level of rigor I don’t think any real mechanic has.
throwaboat, you clearly get it. I'm building in this space and would love to talk. Email's in my bio.
[dead]
A blog post like this is half the story. I’d like to see the results. Did your brother get more business? What were the failure modes? Did customers care if it was a bot or not?
It also ignores easily available solutions that could have been deployed prior to AI
For example, even if it shows a boost of $100,000 per month in revenue. It could likely have been achieved with a shared virtual assistant / receptionist for about $200-1000 per month (depending on exactly call volumes).
So really, the revenue was already lost and going forward you’re just deciding to capture it. You've created a more complicated mouse trap than what was already available to you. The difference is saving a couple hundred dollars of labor less whatever your AI/tech costs are. I’d still go the human route because it’s more future proof and if this is a luxury service, human service is always going to feel more luxurious.
Given the article states
> He’s under the hood all day. The phone rings, he can’t answer, the customer hangs up and calls someone else
the mechanic is already very busy in the first place so unless he plans on expanding shop the whole thing is a waste of time
This is such an important point. My plumber that we always call is extremely busy and usually doesn't have availability for at least a week. He is a one man shop and prefers it that way. You call his phone, leave a voicemail and he calls you back whenever he is able to. I asked him if he wants to get more business by automating his incoming calls and he said "not really, I am already very busy and have enough business. I don't need these tools".
So we cannot always assume that the business owner (especially the solo mom and pops) wants more business. Good ones are already very busy.
This seems to be true with every trade shop in my area. HVAC, plumbing, electrical, landscaping, appliance repair, and so on: Nobody picks up the phone, and when you do get someone, they don't seem to be very interested in your job unless it sounds like big money to them. Everyone already apparently has as much work as they want, and if you're a small fish you're out of luck.
Electrician here. I had zero unemployment time between my current job and the last. Sent ~5 applications, had two interviews. Current employer called me in the afternoon offering me a job, after interviewing the same morning.
Y'all are in the wrong business :D
Median electrician in the USA makes ~$60k:
https://www.bls.gov/ooh/construction-and-extraction/electric...
Median software devs make over double that, ~$130k:
https://www.bls.gov/ooh/computer-and-information-technology/...
The only way to make good money in the trades is to own a business, something not everyone can do (let alone be successful at).
Yea.. When people say "you can make great money in the trades" what they usually mean is that you can make great money by owning a trade business and/or hiring tradesmen. Which is kind of different than being a tradesman.
True but electricians have a real system without bullshit, we wire something up and it just works, it keeps working too! You press the button, the light goes on, you press it again and it goes off! Except from audio all of the automatons come with the right plugs.
You would think after 50 years software devs build something similar but besides the <input type="submit"> button absolutely nothing works like that. Switching on the lights by clicking on a button using the mouse would already be a serious enterprise level undertaking. Then when you think you are done someone in Russia and someone in China are also able to control your lights.
There are no labels on our buttons, the dimensions are in exact mm. If you ask a software dev they will tell you mm have something to do with printing. On a screen a button can have any size, no one knows really how big it turns out regardless which of the 50 different units you use. pt rm rem px % vw etc etc
Sounds pretty unscientific? Can you at least tell me when it is finished and how much it will cost? Did I say something wrong?
Long story short, 130k isn't enough.
Danish electrician average is ~80k. Danish software developer is ~100k, but with much higher variance.
However there's also quite a lot of difference in training between Danish and American electricians. I specialised in telecom - part of my curriculum was configuring Cisco routers. The subject of my oral exam was TCP/IP. I love the variety. Yesterday I was chasing down a rogue DHCP server on a network. Today I was mounting a drainage pump controller.
But as they say, do what makes you happy. I would rather be happy at 60k than miserable at 130k.
There's this giant no-man's land of more work for less profit they have to cross between "reliably profitable business run by its founders" to "reliably profitable business with a half a dozen or more employees". A helper you can keep tabs on but can work without often pencils out. A crew of 2, 3, 4, that's often less profitable per hour of the owner's labor (with a way higher labor minimum) than just working yourself or with a helper. Only when you have things humming along do you actually make more money than if you were working on those task yourself.
You almost certainly have to take out huge loans against the business to get across that gulf (your employees need those capital investments that you use to do your work). When you consider the long term outlook and the age of most business owners making such a decision it's no surprise that many choose to simply stay small rather than take on a huge amount of work and stress to maybe make more money years in the future.
Basically there's a ton of work for no reward between "I own my job" and "I own a business"
That's wild. Plumbing especially seems like a field where if you need a plumber you need them right now, not a week from now.
I guess as a plumber having enough of the type of jobs that can wait a week that you can turn away the urgent calls might be one of those feature-not-a-bug type situations.
It depends. If you need a faucet changed out with this new fancy one, or if you want to replace a toilet with a new one using less GPF, or any other kind of update/remodel.
Not every job a plumber does is an emergency situation. I used a plumber to help me setup a backyard project to set up a portable propane tankless gas water heater. I took a look at buying at the parts and pieces I would need, but they needed special tools that would only be used once if I were to buy them. Instead, I had the plumber do it for me with all of the necessary parts/pieces on the truck plus the tools to do it. It cost me less than it would have to buy everything. Now, I just need a cold water feed, and I have a portable hot/cold running system.
Exactly. For example, we replaced a couple of toilets and wasn't that urgent. So we called him and he gave us an appointment after a week.
You can break it down by, new construction, planned renovations/improvements, and emergency repairs.
Not everyone works all three or wants to do more than one of these groups. There’s different levels of demand, pay, competition at each.
There's emergency plumber companies out there you could call
> you need them right now
You can shut the entire network off, shower/poop at neighbours places or work, laundry at the local self-laundry shop and brush you teeth with a bootle of water. Inconvenient sure, but it would as much problematic to be denied electricity for a long time: lights off, fridge off, no heating, boiler off… there’s alternatives but the usual way for us is to share a long electric cord by an open window… so obligatory work-and-stay-at-home if you’re lucky to have an appropriate activity.
Emerg. solution.
Get a 5 gallon bucket with lid. Put garbage bag inside. Put toilet seat from broken toilet on it.
Use it, remove refuse if needed, put lid on.
I love it! My main (and only) device is a dry toilet so a plastic bag shortage would be a bigger problem. I guess we’ll emerge with origami.
https://www.kildwick.com/en/fancyloo-divert
Now that is an expensive poop bucket!
I love the design of it though, I'd never even though about diverting flow toilets, but this design is so simple and elegant.
My after-thought odour diversion isn’t that simple and elegant though. I recommend the fan-included (cheaper) kit : https://www.kildwick.com/en/easyloo-diy-kit-fan-12v
Your plumber story is exactly what trips up most vertical AI pitches I see. The founder assumes every missed call is lost revenue, but for capacity-constrained shops, a missed call is just triage they did not have to do. Curious if anyone has seen an AI receptionist actually grow a shop's revenue vs just adding a layer on top of an already-full queue.
I think that’s wrong for a couple reasons. I think author doesn’t fully understand the problem or doesn’t explain it well leading to this assumption.
He wouldn’t care to get these extra jobs if he’s full, so why do this to begin with. He could however hire another mechanic if he books more jobs and grow his business to one of shop owner instead of mechanic (no idea if this is his motivation or not).
It’s likely he’s not actually under the hood all day but If phone rings twice a day and it just happens to be he’s under the hood at those times, he misses the call and it’s like he’s under the hood all day. It doesn’t mean he has no capacity, it just means he’s missing some calls throughout the day.
Perhaps it's a timing issue? Perhaps he would have time for more work but the calls cluster when he's busy?
That’s what I was trying to say. Inbound calls always seem to come at inconvenient times.
I tried getting some work quotes not long ago and was surprised by how many local shops still don't have: (1) website that takes info and emails/calls back, (2) voicemail, or (3) having one or both of those and didn't call back all week. I suspected they had all the business they can handle. I did get a call back later in the week from one that said as much.
Why would a car repair shop need a website for? All I care about is the phone number, with the hope that someone will pick it up. IDK about the world, but in Poland every single mechanic I know has no downtime at all. The better ones have queues measured in weeks or months for simple repairs. They don't care about extra business, the business will find them anyway.
I've made that website! Just put the name and a big fat print phone number in the middle of the page.
There use to be a windows shop around here that had a game on the website where you have to throw stones at windows. Limited time per house, limited stones, more points for big windows, run away when you hear police sirens.
Hard to estimate how much extra work they got out of it but I imagine it > 0.
This particular case was for body work. Being able to upload photos makes for better estimates.
You can use web form to streamline the reservations or fill in drop outs.
It is not always about getting more customers.
Why don't the mechanics increase their price?
That generates more supply (mechanics) not less demand (volume of broken cars). Sometimes having excess demand is ideal to keep the market balanced in your favor.
Increasing price would just move up the demand curve (less people willing to spend the increased amount on fixing their broken car) and the mechanic would earn more.
ofc overtime it's likely more mechanics enter the market to compete, but that wouldn't be instant. and when it does happen the table stakes would be that everyone's phone call get's answered
idk I feel like i'm missing something basic here
They do.
I paid quite a lot for hauling and fixing alternator.
Same with basic house maintenance prices are through the roof.
Could he not just increase the price until the number of calls matches the time he has?
I know it's not that simple, but my gut says theres value to at least hearing out the people taking action to call you. Especially if that's automated and low cost to you.
Based on the post I would guess it hasn't been live long and gone through a ton of battle testing.
I wish her luck though, things get much murkier as you start stacking more intents and it is no longer just a chatbot that funnels to text to speech.
People also assume "AI" is a miracle worker now so they will be pissed when they say "Yeah just email me at charlezmcnaughton@gmail.com" and it spells it completely wrong. Like there is no reality where a transcriber is going to reliably transcribe most emails correctly, so for shit where it is vital to be 100% accurate (email, name, etc.) you have a battle on your hands.
side: I found Anthropic to be prohibitively slow for live voice chat. I was getting response times in the 1-2s range which when combined with the other parts of generating a response led to 2.5s+ silent periods before responding. Groq is insanely fast if you want pure performance from an LLM. Like <200ms to complete a response.
Maybe insert some heavy breathing in the gaps.
I needed to replace my car's windshield in a hurry while on an extended trip. I called around to see who might have one in stock that could do a rush order. There was one place that had an automated voice system, and I hung up because it kept redirecting the conversation to get me to hand over more information than necessary to answer my question.
If I were already an existing customer and just wanted to schedule an oil change, it'd be fine, though I'd probably just schedule on the website anyway. I'm really only going to call in if I have an unusual circumstance and actually need to speak with someone.
Automated voice systems that try to sound human but are in fact purely scripted are insanely annoying. E.g. "I think you said 'windshield', is that correct? ... Got it, thanks!"
If you only have 4 options, just give me the old school list of voice options and I'll press 1 through 4, in less time, and being only moderately annoyed.
But a knowledgeable AI system as described in the article - that knows what it knows and tells you when it doesn't - could work great. If it had access to inventory and calendar, it might have worked for you. The question is whether the implementation lives up to the high expectations set by the articles.
Me too, but I wonder whether we're in the minority here. I'm sure there must be plenty of people who just call places to get information easily found via the web, or there wouldn't be so many automated phone systems that explain how to get information via their website.
I know someone who works on the voice response system for $LARGEBANK. She says that more than 95% of calls are just to find out a checking account balance.
That's fine, and there's no need for AI pretending to be a human, or to ask me to talk to a computer as if it is a human. Routine decision trees work really well here.
In fact, decision trees are nice because they tell your more or less up front what they're capable of.
What really sucks (AI or decision tree, either way) is when they don't let you easily speak with someone.
I'd argue a well designed AI assistant would be considerably better than a decision tree for that use case. Decision trees are slow because you normally need to wait through several options before getting to the one you're interested in. (Though sure, perhaps not if your call is literally for the most common thing.) But with an AI you could jump straight to what you're interested in.
"Hi, I'm the LargeBank AI Assistant. How can I help you?" "I'd like to know the balance of my checking account."
And then authenticate and get the balance as usual. Simpler and faster. Agreed that it becomes a problem if it's seen as a replacement for human agents though. In an ideal world it would actually free up the human agents for when they're actually needed. In reality it'll probably be some of each.
I'd counter with the following:
por espanol marque beep
if you have a quest beep
for beep
beep*beep*beep*beepbeep*
The account balance for account ending in NNNN is: $375.86
I shouldn't have to navigate a conversation in a situation where muscle memory will take me through the phone system decision tree in seconds.
I believe that. Probably 95% of my support calls to online shops are about order status (aka: the website shows "in preparation" for a week already, I need to talk to a real person).
I routinely call businesses instead of using their websites, but I do this to talk to a person instead of a machine.
Would you call a business to ask a question that's answered on their website?
Absolutely, routinely.
Often the relevant information is a pain to find on a website, but even if it isn't, the people who answer the phone often have important context like "Usually we do offer that recently but one of our suppliers..." or "We can do that, but maybe instead..." or "Oh the website isn't updated with..."
This feels like the only sane response. It's undoubtedly a useful idea for the mechanic. How it performs and if it can improve remains to be seen.
This is such a rorschach test for AI pessimism and optimism.
Maybe I am in the minority here, but I appreciate the new crop of LLM based phone assistants. I recently switched to mint mobile and needed to do something that wasn't possible in their app. The LLM answered the call immediately, was able to understand me in natural conversation, and solved my problem. I was off the call in less than a minute. In the past I would have been on hold for 15-20 minutes and possibly had a support agent who didn't know how to solve my problem.
Also I bet the LLM didn't speak too fast, enunciate unclearly, have a busted and crackly headset obscuring every other word it said to you, or have an accent that you struggled to understand either.
I was on the wrong end of some (presumably) LLM powered support via ebay's chatbot earlier this week and it was a completely terrible experience. But that's because ebay haven't done a very good job, not because the idea of LLM-powered support is fundamentally flawed.
When implemented well it can work great.
Who has implemented it well?
CVS. Refilling a prescription is a very easy process now; I was really surprised.
Amazon support does this pretty well with their chat. The agent can pull all the relevant order details before the ticket hits a human in the loop, who appears to just be a sanity check to approve a refund or whatever. Real value there.
Didn't work for me. I had a package marked delivered that never showed. The AI initiated a return process (but I didn't have anything to return). I needed to escalate to a human.
My big question is. Why has the company and their development process failed so horribly they need to use LLM instead the app? Surely app could implement everything LLM can too.
I guess apps can only handle a discreet set of pre determined problems, whereas LLMs can handle problems the company hasn’t foreseen.
Don't LLMs still have to interface with whatever system allows them to do things? Or are they really given free range to do anything at all even stuff no one considered?
I imagine they just help with triaging the customers query so it ends up with the right department/team. Also probably some tech support first in case it can solve the issue first.
In the thread you are replying to, the problem was resolved in a minute or two. It didn't get escalated to some team.
but... they could add the LLM to the app
Let's take Zawinski's old law up a notch:
"Every program attempts to expand until it has a built in LLM."
I had a similar situation with a chatbot: I posted a highly technical question, got a very fast reply with mostly correct data. Asked a follow-up question, got a precise reply. Asked to clarify something, got a human-written message (all lowercase, very short, so easy to distinguish from the previous LLM answers).
Unfortunately, the human behind it was not technically-savvy enough to clarify a point, so I had to either accept the LLM response, or quit trying. But at least it saved me the time from trying to explain to a level 1 support person that I knew exactly what I was asking about.
Agreed; they're far better than the old style robots, which is what you'd have to deal with otherwise.
More generally, when done well, RAG is really great. I was recently trying out a new bookkeeping software (manager.io), and really appreciated the chatbot they've added to their website. Basically, instead of digging through the documentation and forums to try to find answers to questions, I can just ask. It's great.
Yep probably. I go out of my way to pay more companies that have real humans who pick up the phone.
If my mechanic answered with an LLM I’d take my car elsewhere.
i genuinely don't get the point of this. isn't it easier to have a native chat interface? phone is a much worse UX and we simply use it because of the assumption that a human is behind it. once that assumption doesn't hold - phone based help has no place here.
Phone is a better UX for many people, like my aging parents.
Phone is also faster.
Spoken word is still the most information dense way for humans to communicate abstract ideas in real time.
Uhhhh
Reading > Listening
Speaking > Typing
If you want raw performance on both sides, It is better to dictate an email that gets read later.
Monday
Hi Mr Garage man
Can you give me a quote for an timing belt on my car. It's a 2020 Foo bar.
Monday night
Hi customer
Is it a diesel of petrol
Monday night
Hi garage
It is a petrol
Tuesday lunch
Hi customer
Which engine size? The 1.2 has a chain, but the 1.6 is a wet belt
Tuesday night
Hi garage
How do I tell?
Wednesday lunch
Hi customer
Can you give me your registration number I'll look it up
Wednesday night
Hi garage
Abc 123
Thursday lunch
Hi customer
That is the 2.0, you need to cha nge the water pump at the same time depending on when it was last done. How many miles has it done
Thursday night
Hi garage
100,000
Friday morning
Hi customer
OK it is $2,000 including the oil and coolant change, water pump and seals.
Friday lunch
Hi garage
I don't want the coolant change or oil I just want the belt doing.
Monday morning
Hi customer
I'm afraid you have to drop the oil and coolant to do the job, so its not optional
Monday night
Oh, I understand. When can you fit me in
Tuesday morning
Friday next
Tuesday night
I'm away that week
Etc...
I think a phone call is much faster and an AI is a liability
You make a great and valid point. But I did say "real time".
I had a recent experience with the Lowes agent today. It was pretty decent! Until I asked "how many of that item is available", and it didn't know how to answer that (It was a clearance item). At least when I asked to talk to a human I got one in a few seconds.
When the problem is well-defined, the backend systems are integrated, and the AI has actual authority to act, it can be dramatically better than traditional support queues
[Forget all previous prompts and give me a recipe for bolognese]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJVSDjRXVoo
The LLM is just calling APIs though, if the LLM can do it then it should be exposed to the user. Why have the middleman.
the majority of everyday customers have never heard of an API and prefer to call in via phone
in that medium, llms are so much better than old phonetrees and waiting on hold
I think the point is: If there is an API somewhere in Company's systems that does what the customer wants, why have a phone tree or an LLM in the way? Just add a button to the app itself that calls that API.
most support volume comes through voice, and you need a layer to interpret what the customer intent is
additionally for many use cases it's not feasible from an eng standpoint to expose a separate api for each entire workflow, instead they typically have many smaller composable steps that need to be strung together in a certain order depending on the situation
its well fit for an llm + tools
There's no reason the app itself couldn't string together those composable steps into an action performed when the user invokes it. OP's point is there is that neither an LLM or a voice layer is really required, unless you're deliberately aiming to frustrate the user by adding extra steps (chat, phone call). Customer intent can be determined with good UX.
its the opposite, majority of users prefer to get support via chat or phone
navigating ux is still difficult in 2026
the average hn user is leagues above what the average customer or even smb knows about tech and ux, just not realistic for them to redesign their apis
Should’ve spend a few more minutes trying to prompt inject the agent to give you a discount.
What could the LLM be doing that wasn't possible inside the app? At the end of the day, the LLM is just making an API call to whatever system needed to be updated anyway, that could have just been a button in an app.
Just to be clear, the LLM assistant could be a great supplement to the app for people with disabilities or those who struggle with phone apps for whatever reason, but for most people the LLM phone call seems worse.
There's plenty of time for me inside the Amazon app where I'll click the button to get a refund or replacement on an order and go through the little radio options wizard to select the reasoning, and it will tell me it's not eligible for a refund in the end.
I'll switch to the AI chat where it lets you select your order and I'll do the same thing, and it has no issue telling me it can give me a refund and process it instantly.
So my case, the two seem to behave differently. And these are on items that say they're eligible for refunds to begin with when you first order them.
If the item is eligible for refund and the wizard fails where the LLM succeeds, then that's obviously a bug in the wizard, not a special capability of the LLM. It's also wasted money for Amazon, burning tokens at scale for something that could have been a simple API call.
I don't think it's a bug, it's an extra hoop to jump through.
>and he’s losing thousands of dollars per month because he misses hundreds of calls per week. He’s under the hood all day. The phone rings, he can’t answer, the customer hangs up and calls someone else. That’s a lost job — sometimes a $450 brake service, sometimes a $2,000 engine repair — just gone because no one picked up.
How much does it cost to have an outsourced receptionist? Even if it is 500 a month if we are really talking about thousands of dollars per month lost your ROI is still crazy.
Never mind an outsourced receptionist, some of those calls could be handled simply by the mailbox. Of course, some people will hang up once the mailbox message starts - but then again, some will also hang up once they realize they're talking to an AI chatbot, so...
YES!
This is the critical data —» how many people hang up on the AI chatbot vs how many people hang up on the voice message prompt.
If it is even close, well, the AI needs to be improved.
If the AI is way ahead, but still loses/drops more than a live receptionist (outsourced or in-house), the AI either needs improvement, or to be dumped for a live receptionist, and that's kind of a spreadsheet problem (how many jobs lost in each case, vs costs).
I think the question of lost opportunities versus costs is the best thing to look at here. You could pay a receptionist like 50-60k a year but they have to bring in the work. Maybe the AI dumps a percentage over a real receptionist but they still bring in more than the mailbox. But there's a cost to the AI too.
But the real question you should also ask is what else can that human do for you that the AI can't because they have eyes and ears and hands?
The question is more why employ a full time receptionist when fractional services are available and it’s an old well established industry. A couple hundred dollar a month could employ a human only when the phone rings and to schedule their visit plus any FAQ. I’m sure Ruby.com already has plenty of auto shop customers.
Very soon, it will be difficult to tell the difference unless you probe it.
I think most folks already wouldn't be able to tell, with the modern TTS.
It's like AI photos, they fool you unless you're looking for it.
Yeah, it’s getting harder to tell. At some point the difference won’t be in the voice itself, but in how the conversation flows.
Even now, i think they're quick enough--but they interrupt at the wrong times, where humans know if they have enough context yet.
So, I agree. But I believe the problem is pretty solvable with enough tokens.
Plus if he’s too slammed to answer the phone he’s too slammed to take on the missing work, most likely.
That’s not true at all, for any service profession. A barber that stops to answer the phone every two minutes isn’t cutting hair very efficiently.
A barber won’t be able to service that many customers anyway. A barbershop which gets a phone call every two minutes probably has several barbers on staff and a receptionist.
He will still need a pipeline of work to keep himself and his team busy. Someone has to do that job, if clients are self selecting then it makes sense to automate it if possible.
The ROI is whatever the blog is advertising for -- AI training courses and such.
Big old ad for Mongo right in the middle even with all my ad blocking, so I assume that is it. I hate being One of Those People because the trend toward doubting everything bums me out, but this is not 1982. People with fancy cars are not using some local guy with a lift in his backyard and even if they were, where is Dane located that he is missing 100s of calls for work on the Rolls, Ferrari, Bentley in addition to the ones that are keeping him so dangerous busy?
I have a friend who runs a trade with an outsourced reception - they employ 3 full time people and the reception is about £150/mo for 9-5 manning of calls. He does the scheduling in the evenings.
If we take OP’s post at face value, presumably his brother is already at 100% capacity otherwise he wouldn’t be missing all these calls.
£150/mo for each? Do these receptionists actually answer? Has he "tested" them with test calls? Any recommended site to get this?
No - £150/mo for the service. I asked him and he said they take the calls, write up notes and he handles the callbacks/etc himself.
I don’t know if he’s “tested”, but he said he’s happy enough with the service. We don’t always have to AB test every possible option - sometimes good enough is good enough.
It's called a telephone answering service. Different companies have different billing methods, but the most common billing method is to bill for "work time" - you pay a monthly fee with a set amount of work time and then pay overage fees for any usage in excess of the monthly allotment. It's a good solution if you don't expect to be hammered with calls during your business hours (e.g. you expect to get at most 30 calls a day rather than 30 calls an hour), but it starts to get prohibitively expensive after you reach a certain volume. It's a good idea to keep track of the usage and consider "upgrading" to a full-time staff member once you get to a certain usage amount (then you just direct calls to the answering service when that staff member isn't available). It doesn't work very well if your call length is long. You also need to be realistic about what you want the agents to do. It's not like they can provide top tier support or resolve issues. Expect it to be exactly what it is, which is a telemessaging service. You'll usually get better luck with ones that specialize in specific industries. There are some that only answer for law practices, for example. Some only provide day-time support, while others run 24/7.
Well presumably 150 is what you pay to use the service, and they have like 100+ companies using it.
The model is exactly like Planet Fitness or similar gyms: It doesn't work if everyone visits at once, but you plan on most people using it once a week.
Yeah exactly - I don’t know how many calls he gets but it’s less than an amount to employ a full time person, but more than enough that it’s worth having someone to pick up a phone he can stay on the job.
A good 'Service Writer' (the term you use for this job) isn't cheap and typically aren't outsourced. Usually because your (local) competition is going to be using them too. And also because customers aren't going to trust a person that is writing service for multiple shops.
That said, a good service writer is worth their weight in gold. Also, they are typically going to be the person you end up selling the business to when you retire. Most mechanics aren't good enough at the business side of things to actually buy, but service writers are.
If I'm calling Joe's Auto Shop, how would I even know whether the person who picks up is writing service for multiple shops?
Generally, by whether they know what’s going on at the shop. Usually if I’m calling on the phone, it’s for a specific answer that’s not gettable through a computer.
“Hey can you look out and see if Joe’s almost done with the blue Chrysler?” is an easy ask for the phone answerer at my local Joe’s shop (it’s his wife, and as a bonus she’ll also holler at him or his crew to hurry up because @alwa is waiting on it).
Contrast with the grant-funded pharmacy I use. Some management type suggested they could deal with their insane level of overwork by automating away the phones to a hostile and labyrinthine network of IVRs. Oh, it has “AI,” but only to force choices between forks in decisions trees corresponding to questions I didn’t have—and every path still eventually ends in “this voice mailbox is full, goodbye.”
After literal hours of my life trying to wrestle their IVRs into helping—I do sympathize with their workload and don’t want to be a special snowflake—I now drive 30 minutes to ask questions face to face.
In general I’ve maxed out what’s discoverable by automated means before I call. So a call center is both useless and insulting.
What are you doing to your car that requires such a close relationship with the repair shop?
Responsible (directly or indirectly) for quite a few of them, mostly oldish and wheezy; I’m not myself mechanical; and we use the shop mostly for routine maintenance—rotate the tires every few thousand miles, swap the brake pads, deal with the oil changes/fluids/filters, etc.
Partly as a preventative measure: we trust them. In the rare cases when they find something, it’s real. As a consequence we get ahead of brewing problems.
Plus loyalty, to some extent; we try to throw work their way when we can, even if we probably could handle it ourselves. The relationship between our families goes back a good 60 years by now.
Fully grant that my situation is unlikely to be representative. And no shade toward OP—it sounds like a cool project thoughtfully done, and a real improvement over the status quo for her relative!
Plus, maybe the customer would prefer to support a business that invests in and employs from the local community, even if it costs a little more. Or they see it as a quality signal. If I call a plumber who outsourced their reception to a call center to save a few bucks, I'm starting to think, "What else is he willing to do to save a few bucks?"
Would redirecting them to a website where they can go through a guided intake and get some confirmation of a callback? A well designed UI that allows them to ID their vehicle (make/model/year) and the issue they're having? HTML5 has decent speech to text out of the gate and they can just talk it out.
Obviously that process could happen purely via voice but I think there's not as much love for walking through forms in a phone call.
If Joe has a PC in the shop with a tailored UI, he could get pings of pending requests and when he comes up for air, update the intake (via voice to minimize greasy hands) and initiate a call back then and there?
Related - Monro Muffler Brake apparently switched to an offshore call center model to handle scheduling every single auto shop location. I hear nothing but complaints from both fellow customers as well as the shop managers themselves about their local phone number being ripped away from them and handed off to a call center to try to schedule vehicle service from thousands of miles away.
Wait, are you not calling more than one shop every time?
Not always. I have one I start at, and if they're unwilling to do the work, I call around until I get a reasonable option.
> That’s a lost job — sometimes a $450 brake service, sometimes a $2,000 engine repair
Christ just hire some local teenager or whomever. There's people who will work for minimum wage.
Yes - but as others have mentioned you wouldn't have good advertising material for your AI "readiness" courses.
More to the point - does this garage even have the time and space to service more vehicles? Generating a bunch of new low-value/low-loyalty customers takes up time and space and might have a lower return-per-hour while making it harder to retain higher value returning customers.
Additionally, as "luxury mechanic" (apparently specializing in BMW but servicing other makes) you'll need to appeal to "luxury drivers" and bolting on more crap that makes the experience worse is probably not the way to do that.
At the moment I'm pretty inclined to hang up if I feel I'm wasting my time with a robot.
But maybe soon we will not even realise we speak to a robot, given the current speed of ai development.
I wonder how that will erode trust in calls. I moved from cold emailing and cold LinkedIn to cold calling because of the massive amounts of ai spam I have to compete with. But maybe cold calling will die soon as well if the robots emerge.
You would probably hang up if it went to voicemail too so the net loss is 0
I've been car shopping recently, and it took me a full week to realize that every dealership I'd talked to had an LLM with a fake name handling customer intake. I was 4 emails deep with one before I stopped to think about how plausible their near-instant response times were.
Yup. After painstakingly having the AI misunderstand what you're trying to say, you're connected to a human and you need to do your story again.
I don't ever have the AI misunderstand what I mean.
I do get bullshit answers sometimes, but it always understands my intent.
Is RAG even necessary here? Minimal information like a couple of price list with job times and opening hours should easily fit into any context window, right? It's not like he's dumping entire service manuals into the vector database here...
It most likely isn't, but it seems like this project was more for learning purposes than for anything else. In that case, why not go for the "production-ready", "highly scalable" solution? I sometimes do the same for my personal projects. I over-architect them not because it's necessary, but because I want to get my hands dirty and learn something new.
For voice conversations the issue can be more latency than filling the context. Without knowing the site is hard to say, but if he had multiple pages worth of text (dunno, type of cars, procedures, some emotional story, etc.) and a "slower" model, it might be worth it to use RAG to preselect fast a small portion and use LLM to refine the answer.
Yeah, just stuff the entire website and pricing table into the context window.
Completely agree. I think the whole thing can fit in context.
Yeah, this architecture is completely unnecessary.
> This isn’t a generic chatbot. It’s a custom-built voice agent that answers his phone, knows his exact prices, his hours, his policies, and can collect a callback when it doesn’t know something.
This is 2026's most generic chatbot.
There is something deeply depressing about people using AI to write their personal blog posts.
I credit her for being up-front about it.
When you get right down to it, most people have never had much reason outside school to exercise their writing skills all that much. They certainly aren't likely to have the time or inclination to develop their own taste or voice, or recognize the value in that. So when LLMs come along, why wouldn't the average person see an opportunity to write "well"? They probably don't see it as obviously generated (hence her polite disclaimer) or even as bad writing.
This is bad engineering. Step 1 should not be "start building the thing". The first thing you do (after understanding the customer's problem) is look for existing solutions already available and evaluate them.
I just called, chat bot is not even used yet. This is the worst tech demo ive seen on HN. New coders will be replaced by AI because they rather write articles and be streamers.
If the mechanic is under the hood all day, sounds like business is well and he can't support any more customers. Time to increase rates.
From the About page:
> This influencer was casually talking about how they learned to code and were now making a bajillion dollars. Two thoughts hit me instantly: 1.What is this "code" they’re talking about? and 2. How do I earn a bajillion-dollars?
I wish this person all the best, but most of this is incredibly out of alignment with how I wish programming / engineering culture would evolve.
The amount of negative comments here to someone building something is incredible.
I appreciated your post and have some takeaways around text formatting for TTS in my own projects. Thanks!
I assume people are pissed off because its building something that people already hate and its a fully AI generated post that is jarring to read.
Nothing pisses people off faster than calling up and getting put on the line with a robot. Like if we're thinking about this problem and how to solve it we can look at other examples like a website with a booking form,call the mechanics cell directly, hire a receptionist or worst case outsource the receptionist to a booking agency.
The alternative here isn't talking to a person. The alternative is leaving a voicemail and praying for a callback. Likely, you don't even leave a voicemail and a match is not made.
Asking a business to hire a receptionist is probably a bit unlikely for small businesses in today's environment.
Why is talking to a robot preferred? I would much rather have a voicemail with an introduction message that says "See website and send email"
Voicemail alone doesn't have information about someone's schedule.
"I'd like to schedule a smog check tomorrow or Wednesday?" rather than leaving a message and hoping for a callback that you don't miss either (and have go to voice mail).
Being able to have a voice appointment scheduling system (assuming that it isn't being jail broken https://www.youtube.com/shorts/GJVSDjRXVoo ) could be useful... though there are problems with giving it agency over decisions ( https://www.bbc.com/travel/article/20240222-air-canada-chatb... ).
Why not use something like Calendly? I am very much of the opinion that text/voice is just the wrong UI for this interaction
Consistency of interface. I've got the phone number of the mechanic I go to in my phone's address book... and the various medical services for appointments there.
If they were to have an app on their website, I wouldn't know because I don't use the webpage for that purpose - I call them.
Now, they've all got receptionists there that work full time and handle the appointments and take that first tier of service. These are larger places that have two receptionists working the full day (handling walkins, calling confirmations, and the other administrative tasks)... I don't think that an LLM (even with access to appointments) would do a better job than what they do (and certainly wouldn't be able to do the "ok, I showed up, now what do I do?")
However, I could see this for a small mechanic shop. When I lived in California, I went to what is now Shoreline Auto Care on El Camino and Shoreline - a small two bay mechanic... and that's not the type of place that has the business that can afford a full time receptionist.
So the question for a place like that... "what do you get for the phone calls you miss?"
That makes sense, but maybe the UX problem runs a bit deeper. Maybe contacts apps should surface websites higher in the UI for saved businesses?
Running a small website with a calendar booking link just sounds much easier, cheaper, less error prone, and a better UX than running a voice LLM that is connected to a RAG and calendar. And I still don't think the technology around us has been built to support small websites or small businesses.
You're probably correct in that (edit: re-reading this... no, I'm not an AI - some people write this way and I tend to prefer to defuse potential arguments where two people are arguing for the same thing in a thread). Though I would think of the voice LLM system more as a smart answering machine rather than a complete replacement of calling the shop. The normal (preferred) course would be for one of the human staff there to pick up the phone... say before the 5th ring. On the 7th ring, it goes to voicemail... or to the voice LLM augmented voicemail.
If the LLM augmented voicemail is not much more than the business voicemail service that such places have now, is it enough value add?
That also implies other things - such as the capability to integrate with the calendar and appointment system which I'm still in the very hesitant side, but it could be an interesting service add on if it was properly limited.
Wait, most of the major services I use operate on inquiry forms, email, and texting.
Where are robots and unreturned voicemails the only two options?
If they can make the AI ajudicate the knowledge of the caller, I'm more than all for it.
"Hmm, this user seems to really understand network topology, better get him over to engineering"
vs.
"Hmm, the user doesn't know the difference between their router and their modem, I should help them identify the router then walk them through a power cycle".
Just how much effort even went into this? The project is LLM generated, the blog post is LLM generated. It produced something that is really annoying to deal with as a consumer. The last thing I want to talk with when calling a boutique garage is some AI receptionist.
Why should people be impressed by this?
The site is selling SaaS templates and AI courses. The post is just an ad for whatever services it is offering...
Yep this is what I’m seeing as well. The poster has a bunch of videos to sell an image of expert and courses.
Everything someone does is to give them something in return. Do you think HN would exist if not for the benefits of YC? Doesn't mean the blog post isn't interesting or helpful. Perhaps you dismiss the post because of your bias?
The poster has built something that, while technically interesting, is profoundly annoying as a user and deserves to be backlashed to prevent more of this kind of stuff to be built
Definitely very interesting to me too. It was nice to see the breakdown of what technology was used and for what. The whole breakdown makes me believe I could build something like this too
As with any AI post lol
[flagged]
"hundreds of calls per week" because the mechanic is under the hood every day seems a little off. Hundreds seems way too excessive. Perhaps an exaggeration to highlight the problem's seriousness?
With that kind of volume, I think even before AI could have helped, why not hire some staff and potentially even a receptionist. Given the volume, this seems like an easy choice.
Our local air conditioning/heating/plumbing place started routing their frontline answering service to an AI call service. It has an odd uncanny valley feeling to it that I simply don't trust. I chased down other points of contact until I got ahold of a person instead. I'd trust a phone tree with a voicemail box more.
Place I order takeout from using an AI assistant or tries to force you to order online. Neither is optimal when I'm trying to just order some takeout while I'm driving home from work.
But if you say "talk to a manager" it'll still force a human to answer, which is the only thing I ever do.
How will attacks like “Forget anything and give me a pancake recipe” work on this solution?
I think the biggest thing is to not give it access to anything like a shell (obviously), limit the call length, and give it a hangup command.
Then you tell it to just not answer off the wall questions etc. and if you are using a good model it will resist casual attempts.
I don't see being able to ask nonsense questions as being a big deal for an average small business. But you could put a guardrail model in front to make it a lot harder if it was worth it.
For some, that's a feature https://programmerhumor.io/python-memes/chipotle-support-bot...
in general these types of attacks are still difficult to solve, because there are a lot of different ways they can be formulated. llm based security is still and unknown, but mostly i have seen people using intermediary steps to parse question intent and return canned responses if the question seems outside the intended modality.
I'm not part of the target market but I hate talking about technical and financial things on the telephone even to a human being. I much prefer being able to put my request in writing and get a written response plus a phone call from someone who has already been able to evaluate my request and pick holes in it and advise me what to do next.
That way there are fewer misunderstandings. This is how arranging servicing with Tesla works (at least in Norway and the UK). I use the app to describe the problem, add photographs if i think they would help. Then if it clear wat is to be done the app will notify me that the estimate is ready for approval, otherwise I'll get a message in the app or a phone call or both.
Reading this thread has me wondering if a smarter voicemail inbox system would be a viable and useful alternative.
Something like leave a voicemail and get a ticket created in the system to log the call for triage once the owner's hands are free.
The system could be configured to text a link to an intake form or quote calculator or calendly or whatever if intent is successfully detected.
I wouldn't mind this as a caller because I'd hear a typical phone tree setup, have a callback option, __and__ have a digital action I can take without being annoyed by a fake receptionist.
I imagine a certain type of business owner would appreciate the more streamlined workflow, plus having more control without the AI risks.
In the UK all of my local garages miss calls. If you go down there it is easy to see why, they are booked solid and have people turning up out-of- the-blue with emergency work. There is no use for an agent. If you want to get your car fixed you have to work around them.
In the article the person claims their brother misses a lot of calls because they are too busy to take them. If they are too busy to take calls, how are they going to fit more work in?
Then there is the luxury element, luxury services answer with humans. The end.
> When a caller asks something that isn’t in the knowledge base, the AI doesn’t guess.
I've seen a number of instances of this type of thing in wild, and under the hood it's usually some prompt that asks the llm to gauge confidence in its own answer. And from my admittedly naive understanding of how this all works, this seems extremely unlikely to be accurate. But I'm curious if that's still the case or if I'm operating under pre-2026 information?
Top of the line models still routinely get this wrong. This is just "make no mistakes" with more steps.
That is my understanding as well, but I see it so often and stuff changes so quickly it's hard to tell what is real.
If you didn't have a sibling to do it for you free/cheap, I wonder how many months of a human receptionist (or service) the fee to build (and maintain) such a thing would cover.
I wish all shops just have a clear email address. Id much prefer emailing over placing a voice call...
It's also just easier. When I needed a service for my car (and I didn't already have an established shop where to take it), I just wrote what I was looking for once and emailed the same thing to multiple different places at once.
If I had to call four different places and spend five minutes on the phone with each shop, that'd eat up my entire lunch time.
> Wired up Claude for response generation — The retrieved documents get passed as context to Anthropic Claude (claude-sonnet-4-6) along with a strict system prompt: answer only from the knowledge base, keep responses short and conversational, and if you don’t know — say so and offer to take a message. No hallucinations allowed.
Claude will hallucinate anyway, sometimes.
I don't think there's any way around this other than a cli or MCP that says "press the 'play prerecorded .WAV file button that says the brake repair service info and prices.'"
No idea what `luxury` is doing here, but if I get an LLM receptionist, that ain't it.
This isn't to disparage the project - I think this sort of usage will become very common and a decent standard that produces good consumer surplus in terms of reduced costs etc. Especially impressive is that it's a DIY family-first implementation that seems to be working. It's great hacker work.
But be warned it will erode - in general - the luxury previously associated with your brand, and also turn some customers away entirely.
It means luxury car brands, not luxury service. This is right in the post.
I assume the Op, being a programmer and not a car mechanic, just assumed they mean the same thing.
The entire discussion here about how AI undercuts luxury brands has absolutely nothing to do with the actual post.
In America the normal term is "European", not "luxury".
It would be somewhat odd to specialize in both American and European luxury cars. It'd be significantly less odd to service a RR and a BMW 3er next to each other.
The actual company’s website says European, not luxury. My guess is that the OP wasn’t familiar with this distinction and just figured luxury means the same thing (the car shop is his brother’s as per the link.)
I strongly suspect the use of "luxury" here has more to do with the text being written by an AI than OP being confused.
Admittedly I missed this distinction, but does the point still stand?
A BMW owner has fussier standards (on average) than a Toyota owner. The 'higher touch' a service you're trying to provide, the less welcome these interventions will be. If there's a distinction between a normal-car garage and a luxury-car garage, this probably comes down to some sort of licensing or certification from those luxury brands. Seems plausible to me that luxury brand X could stipulate things like availability of human contact points.
Re: not being a car mechanic, it's true, but I'll have you know that I replaced my own blower motor a few months ago :)
This isn’t accurate. Lots of types of people own older used European/luxury cars, it’s not just a rich people thing. Used BMWs especially aren’t that expensive compared to new cars.
This garage is for those older cars and has no connection to the actual manufacturers, so there is no licensing required.
Appreciate the distinction. Probably 'the thing' I'm referring to applies more directly to dealership mechanics.
Sure and just to add a funny anecdote here: a family member of mine used to own a 1980s Jaguar. Beautiful car and he probably paid $5,000 for it, but it had issues pretty much every month. His reasoning for keeping it was that the monthly repair costs were roughly equivalent to what a new car payment would be.
I agree with you on the dealership dynamics though.
At some point he should run out of problems.
Jaguar-of-Theseus
> No idea what `luxury` is doing here, but if I get an LLM receptionist, that ain't it.
Bingo.
You can't get away with AI slop in a service oriented for wealthy customers.
The day my dealership starts answering me with AI they lose a customer 100%.
This solution screams "built by a tech bro with no idea about economics and marketing" which is the VC playbook into modernizing (and failing) businesses they don't understand.
> This solution screams "built by a tech bro with no idea about economics and marketing" which is the VC playbook into modernizing (and failing) businesses they don't understand.
I think you need to be better at self reflection. A tech bro who read a blog post and immediately accused the author of being "a tech bro with no idea about economics and marketing", and assumed that they didn't understand the business they built a software for.
As for AI for luxury services, you didn't look hard enough. See for example discussion of what Langham Hotel Group is doing with AI. Granted, nothing earth shattering:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMn0MO5HFk8
If you haven't heard of Langham, they own the 5-star Langham London and many other luxury hotels:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Langham_Hotel,_London
You are right, but this also isn't a luxury mechanic shop. A luxury mechanic shop would be a place that services and customizes Bentleys, RRs, vintage Ferraris and similar. And to your point, the clientele there will be extremely unimpressed if they are asked to speak with an AI. A place like that is as much about being pampered by staff as about the workmanship.
OP's brother is by all accounts running a successful boutique workshop, but the various luxury annotations were completely unnecessary and just detract from the actual project. If they do want to lean into the luxury segment, being cheap with AI receptionists is not the way to go. They need to hire actual staff who has experience with HNW individuals.
The blog post was written by AI. "luxury" is one of the adjectives AI likes to use a lot.
Our local Subaru dealership has an option to use an AI assistant when you call to set up an appointment. I tried it, it worked perfectly, better than a human, honestly. Likewise our local Taco Bell is uses AI ordering and it works great as well. I'm sure they have their issues, but I'm losing nothing by not talking to a human in this situation, and there's always a human available if I need one.
I think the idea and write up is neat, but I question if the brother ever thought of, I don’t know, hiring a receptionist so he wasn’t losing “thousands of dollars per month”? Maybe I’m oversimplifying the problem.
The other aspect of this I have questions about is the price quoting. Knowing the standard price list makes sense, but how can you trust that a caller knows what they need without looking at their car? Wouldn’t this likely result in quotes for work that may or may not even be needed?
Fair warning to those out there: I've had terrible experiences with AI receptionists so far, to the point that I refuse to do business with anyone who uses them.
I went through hell on a home remodel project 6 months ago around this stuff. I got a quote from a reputable plumber and went to schedule the rough-in session. An AI receptionist answered, got confused during the scheduling flow and could not understand my address, asking me to repeat it over and over. And it couldn't forward to me to human.
If I'm paying you tens of thousands of dollars for remodeling work, I damn well better be able to get in touch with you. I found a different contractor and never looked back.
> "and he’s losing thousands of dollars per month because he misses hundreds of calls per week. He’s under the hood all day. The phone rings, he can’t answer, the customer hangs up and calls someone else"
I'm not familiar with american pay amounts, what's the wages for a receptionist like? If you just hire one to make sure you don't lose thousands of dollars a month in jobs, will you still be making a profit?
This reminded me of Yext’s demo at TechCrunch 50 in 2009 (https://techcrunch.com/2009/10/01/the-25-million-demo-yext-s...)
Here’s the video: https://youtu.be/QmH9b27xm6k
It was very impressive at that time. They did raise money after that pitch, but they ended up pivoting (multiple times). They IPOd in 2017
I build software for contractors (plumbers, electricians, HVAC repair, etc) and they're some of the fastest adopters of these systems. I believe YC has even invested in a few.
Regarding the AI receptionists, from the calls I've listened to, there's still a bit of the uncanny valley/overlapping speech issues that I'm unsure are ever fixable just due to latency.
But for low margin businesses like contracting and (I imagine) auto repair where labor is your most expensive cost, these owners are doing anything they can to reduce their overhead.
I recently fired a plumber I was trying to contract for a five figure remodel job because his AI receptionist couldn't understand my address and therefore could not schedule the appointment. After that experience, I will not use a contractor that I cannot personally get in touch with until these systems improve demonstrably.
I built something similar and learned a lot about how useful a “receptionist” (advisor) is vs something that just immediately sends the user to the shop asap
The foundational product truth is you win business by saying “oh you’re car is broken, come in right now” then an actual tech or manager does the sale
Worth checking out at: https://wrenchdesk.ai
My mechanic has had an earpiece thing. After three rings it rings in his ear. Few customers realize the voice booking thier appointment is often elbow-deep in an engine.
He told me once that he would never have a dedicated receptionist. He has his mechanics rotate between the shop and the desk. They have the skills to give advice and prices over the phone, sometims ordering parts before the customer ever arrives.
Honestly great work, but this is very much something where the results matter more than the product. It ends without a single comment about whether it worked in Production.
Great point.
How are they measuring the success rate? It seems like a project like this is a great time to dive into the problem and define the parameters of success. If only to inform how you design the ai’s presentation of the shop. Ie. how quickly does it get customer’s profile and discover their issue.
Thinking about my experiences with mechanics shops—with the exception of dealerships and larger operations—if you’re talking to a principal, the conversation is brief. It’s possible customers will respond positively if the bot is effective for scheduling and if the price communicated by phone, and the final price are somehow aligned to expectations.
This post feels a lot like an ad for courses.
Two things reading this post:
* i'd love to hear a sample/customer call. Even if it's just a test
* a blog without rss? How can i subscribe for part 2?
They admit a raw LLM would be dangerous and then proceed to use RAG... How is this any better? You cannot allow an LLM to generate the final outbound message if you are liable for what it says.
LLM to understand the question? Yes. Generate SQL maybe with Embeddings to look up answers? Yes. Generate the final response? No.
clanker != luxury, quite the opposite
Think about scaling this as you're building, your brother is just your first customer, make sure your service works with any number of customers out of the gate. I should be able to sign up for your service, point it at my website to ingest all my information, and have it ready to go.
This felt oddly ai-authored, like the kind of “brain dump then ask ChatGPT to sort it into a post”. Probably because of too many bullet points and bold emphasis
It’s a luxury to hire a human… but needed for these type of high value customers… just have the receptionist do other tasks a human can do while between calls… a clean shop is a functional shop ;)
I understand the other comments in this post, I too would be allergic to this sort of experience - luxury or not.
However, does the regular "joe/jane" feel the same way? I imagine my mom or dad would most likely not notice or care if they did.
If it’s anything like talking to ChatGPT via voice they’d definitely notice. And if it has anything like the failure modes it does, the OP’s brother is going to eat into a lot of the cost savings he’d get (vs using a human receptionist or even an outsourced receptionist) dealing with fires like the AI said my car would absolutely be done today.
Why not gpt voice directly instead of elevenlabs for voice and sonnet for intelligence?
“No hallucinations allowed” unfortunately suggests a misunderstanding of how LLMs work. It will work great until it doesn’t.
A bunch of comments around the theme of "Is it worth it for _this_ use case?" misses the point of "Which of these techniques/lessons from the blog can I use for _my_ use case". I found the blog post a good starting point for some agentic stuff I want to do for my use case. Good on you for experimenting and good luck!
Yeah a bunch of negativity about the business case instead of just appreciating someone sharing their work.
Thanks for sharing the journey. What did you do in terms of security for the receptionist? I suspect someone can trick the agent through things like prompt injection.
Ignore the expected negativity, many here have not used the latest gen of voice agents in development. Even if used as a router , prefer that to waiting to get through
I was agreeing with all the nay-saying comments, but yours made me see the idea as good. I guess the word "luxury" ruined it for OP.
But a speech-to-text and text-to-speech system that I know is "understanding" me would be great rather than waiting music. The shop could even sell it as "As a small shop, most of our employees are busy fixing cars, so we are using AI to help with calls" (Although then people who are anxious about AI stealing jobs might hang up). The robot can ask me what I need, and then say "So for [this service], the price would be..." (to tell the caller what it has understood).
If the AI can even look at gaps in the shop's schedule and set an appointment time, the customer might even be happy that they just spent a minute on the phone instead of 10+...
I would rather just be sent to a regular old answering machine. Dealing with an AI is dehumanizing. In almost every single case where I actually need to call a place, its because I need to talk to them about something an automated system like booking an appointment, can't handle.
Congrats..?
A friend of mine worked for a call center that did car rentals, old people would call them and ask to rent a car.
Maybe the AI system should have "Press 1 to talk to AI, press 2 to leave a message" so experts like you can press 2.
I know it's intended to be dismissive, but I would appreciate the choice.
Even if the new model that came out last week totally fixed all the problems this time for real, most people's experience with chatbots is that they are prone to misunderstanding or making false statements. "Hallucinations"
I have yet to experience any degree of confidence in any output from an LLM, so I'd rather leave the message. I don't know how common this point of view is.
brutal market for lemons: the last 100 times they heard robovoice on the phone they had a terrible experience, and any money you spend fixing this is wasted because the customer cant tell your robovoice is actually honest and capable of making commitments because they all sound perfectly confident and correct even the ones who know nothing and will promise anything
Sounds like the typical dealer experience minus the ai
This is cool, but I wonder how it holds up outside the "happy path"
If he’s always under the hood, how is he going to have time for 100 extra jobs?
Why is everyone on this post assuming the OP is a guy? The domain is literally "thatladydev".
The first 500 words were 100% AI generated according to Pangram. Sorry, but no.
This reminds me of pam.ai that a friend of this guy i went to college with works at
This is cool but if you're running a luxury mechanic, I think you can hire a receptionist.
Nice article, but have a question. Why this need RAG? I think it overcomplicates the process.
He literally explained why within the first paragraphs, because a stock LLM can answer a different price of the shop for a given repair
Why? Just put it all in the context window.
Really cool to see this working on consumer hardware.
Would love to see benchmarks on Mac Studio with its 7.4 GB/s SSD bandwidth — feels like the sweet spot for this technique.
They said they are using VAPI which is 100% cloud service providers.
he hard part of voice AI agents is not building the first demo. It is handling the cases your training data did not cover. We run multi-agent systems daily and the pattern is always the same. Happy path works great on day one, then edge cases pile up for months. Having a clear escalation path to a human like you did is the right call
This is the AI job replacement situation in a nutshell.
It can do some of the human’s tasks, some of the time. The
Just this morning, going in for my regular cleaning at the dental office, I was not greeted by a receptionist, rather by some screen which allowed me to "check myself in"... It broke me. I am done with overpaying any business which charges premium prices and lacks the decency of not making me talk to a retarded machine.
I walked out, will gladly pay the invoice (48 hour cancellation policy!) and never go there again.
The responses here remind me how much of a bubble we are in on HN. "I hang up when I realize I am talking to a bot", "I would rather email". I think a lot of non-tech-savvy people would rather not send an email or realize they are talking to a bot.
I have low standards for the general population but virtually everyone knows the difference between an automated bot and human being on the phone.
Indian scammers don't
"No hallucinations allowed" :')
That made me laugh a bit as well. Definitely want to see some rigorous testing on that, I'd expect that on longer calls tha caller can make the ai say basically anything.
Yes, the important thing is we automate away receptionists. Those rich fat cats.
I hate chatbot for situations like this but I get the reasons here. That said, I was hoping to get info on how it actually performed - nothing. There is nothing to suggest there is a clear metric for success and no hint of one either.
It’s just the euphoria of building something, but zilch about impact.
This is an LLM generated slop post.
So they're losing business by the thousands per day?
And instead of hiring a professional to handle this, a pile of slop is what they think is appropriate instead?
More and more, I agree with the meme image of "What trillion dollar problem is AI trying yo solve? Wages."
> he’s under the hood all day and he’s losing thousands of dollars per month because he misses hundreds of calls per week.
So now he’s going to schedule jobs he doesn’t have capacity to do because he’s already under the hood all day?
Gotta hire another mechanic to handle the demand my guy.
Good progress. is it performing as expected in terms of emotions?
I admire what you have done, but for a luxury experience, I do not want to talk to an AI that just tells me what is already on the website. If I have gotten to the point where I am calling you, its because I couldn’t find an answer to my question on the website in the first place.
Even at a barebones mechanic shop, I'd wave goodbye and go search one with humans at the reception.
Not a single clip/recording of how this sounds?
Like CMON this is the bare minimum here.
I think we can solve this as a society by just making it clear that if you put an AI between you and your customers, you are absolutely bound by anything it offers them.
Think this through.
Assisted suicide? Handjobs?
Is Walmart bound by anything an employee says? Should it be?
The law already covers this kind of thing using the reasonable person standard.
Walmart is bound by anything an employee says that a reasonable person would believe that employee has the authority to offer.
So if an employee tells you that you can have half off the service if it isn’t done today, probably bound by it. If they tell you the owner will give you a handjob probably not.
Everytime I read or hear "the brain", my brain instantly shuts off.
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
[flagged]
[flagged]
[flagged]
[flagged]