Talosnation

 

The Challenge: Handling high-volume & inconsistent support emails

Handling a high volume of support emails with inconsistent structure and mixed content (bugs, queries, updates, etc.). Manual triage was time-consuming, error-prone, and lacked consistency. Ticket creation delays caused slower response times and poor tracking.

Objective:

Topdesk aimed to achieve several key objectives using this Agentic automation implementation:

 

  • Automate email classification (bug vs. non-bug)
  • Reduce manual triage and decision-making burden
  • Improve consistency in issue identification and response
  • Create a feedback-driven system that learns over time
  • Seamlessly integrate with Lienion for ticket creation
  • Provide auto-generated, reviewable email responses
     

TalosNation's solution: Agentic automation for email classification

An Agentic Automation crew processes incoming support emails. Agents fetch, classify, and route emails, create tickets in Ilenion, and generate email replies. The crew is coordinated by a Knowledge Hub and refined through human-in-the-loop feedback.

 

Technologies: 

 

  • TalosNation Agentic Framework (The Fraim)
  • Large Language Models (LLMs) for classification & response generation
  • Prompt library for structured reasoning and task routing
  • Knowledge Hub integrated with support SOPs and prior ticket data
  • Custom dashboard tabs for finetuning, validation, and human-in-the-loop feedback
  • Integration with Lienion (for automated ticket logging)
  • Email Monitoring APIs (IMAP)

 

Technical Details:​​​​​​ 

Agents Roles

  • Email Fetcher Agent: Pulled new emails periodically
  • Bug Verification Agent: Analyzed content for issue classification
  • Ticket Creation Agent: Created actionable tickets in Lienion
  • Auto Reply Agent: Generated templated email responses using context
     

Feedback/FineTune

  • Two-level human review system (Tab 1 & Tab 2)
  • All feedback logged and used to finetune prompt logic and model accuracy

Knowledge Sources

Ticket format rules, bug classification criteria, prior examples

Task Routing

  • Controlled via prompts and validation phases
  • Crew coordination managed through finetuning dashboard
     

Process: TalosNation's Agentic crew workflow in action

  1. Inbox Monitoring:

    Performed by: Email Fetcher Agent
    Monitors the support inbox and retrieves all new incoming emails in real time for further processing.

     

  2. Content Classification:

    Performed by: Bug Verification Agent
    Analyzes the email content to determine whether it’s a valid bug report or a non-bug message. Classification is based on prompt-driven logic and knowledge hub rules.

     

  3. Finetuning Tabs

    Coordinated by: Crew Orchestrator Logic
    Routes emails to the appropriate validation queue:

    Tab 1: Bug Emails, Tab 2: Non-Bug Emails
    Allows for efficient human-in-the-loop validation and performance feedback tracking.

     

  4. Human Review:

    Supported by: Validation Interface
    Human reviewers verify the agent’s classification decision, make corrections if necessary, and provide structured feedback used to improve agent performance over time.

     

  5. Ticket Creation:

    Performed by: Ticket Creation Agent
    Once a bug email is approved by a human reviewer, this agent creates a task in the Lienion system, assigns it to the correct team, and tags it for tracking.

     

  6. Auto Reply Generation

    Performed by: Auto Reply Agent
    Generates a contextual email response using structured prompt templates, referencing the ticket details. The response is queued for human review.

     

  7. Final Review & Dispatch

    Reviewed via: Response Validation Interface
    A human reviewer checks the auto-generated email for clarity and accuracy. If approved, the response is sent; otherwise, it's manually edited and then dispatched

 

Results: TalosNation's Agentic automation success metrics

As a result of implementing the Agentic Automation crew, the following measurable outcomes were achieved

  • 70–80% reduction in manual triage time
  • Improved ticket quality and response consistency
  • Continuous learning via human feedback
  • Scalable across departments 
  • Clear audit trail for agent decisions