Predictika · Fire protection service agreements

An AI sales agent's fire protection agreement, checked before it goes out

An AI sales agent puts together a multi-site fire and life safety service agreement: extinguishers, kitchen hood suppression, fire alarms and monitoring, sprinklers, emergency lighting, compliance reporting and training. Before the agreement goes out, the agent sends it to Predictika, which checks it against a declarative model, compares the yearly visit count the agent states with the one it computes, and returns a verdict, every reason and the figures it computed.

Scope: Pye-Barker Fire & Safety service agreements for 1 to 100 sites: extinguishers, kitchen hoods, fire alarms and monitoring, sprinklers and backflow, emergency lighting, compliance reporting and training. See everything this validator covers

This validator models fire protection service agreements built from Pye-Barker's public service names, not just the scenarios shown below.

  • Inspection services — Fire Extinguishers (with hydrostatic tests), Restaurant & Kitchen Hoods suppression, Fire Alarm Systems, Fire Sprinkler Systems with Backflow Preventers, and Emergency Lighting, each with its yearly visit count.
  • Monitoring, compliance and training — alarm monitoring, Code Compliance & Reporting, and Fire & Safety Training with its class size.
  • Site types — restaurant, healthcare, warehouse, retail and school sites, each with the services it needs or cannot have.
  • Agreement size — number of sites, the stated yearly visit count against the services quoted, and approvals for national accounts, many visits per site and unmonitored fire alarms.

Any Pye-Barker fire protection service agreement that touches these services and rules is in scope, not only the scenarios pictured here. Service names are Pye-Barker's own public names, and the inspection frequencies follow the published NFPA standards in general terms. The way services depend on each other, the site-type rules, the visit and class-size limits and the approval thresholds are modeled from comparable fire protection agreements and are not Pye-Barker-published rules. Not covered: prices (this validator produces no price build-up or line-item quote), security and video services, installation and retrofit projects, and special hazard systems.

The AI sales agentPuts the service agreement together from the conversation and says it is ready.
Predictika validatorChecks every rule at once and returns the verdict, each finding, and the computed figures.

7 scenarios in 3 groups · each group runs from the agent’s first attempt to the outcome · click one to switch

What the agent proposes

The AI sales agent says

Illustrative agent statement. The validator receives the structured request below.

Proposing agent: AI sales agent (scripted)

Before sending, the agent must call Recorded run

Predictika validator


      

        
        
        
      

      
Waiting for the call.

      
    

  

  
  

    
Where rules-based CPQ gets it wrong
Click to expand
    
Our assessment of what a typical rules-based CPQ (product rules, price rules and validation rules, as in Salesforce CPQ) does with the same cases. It is a judgment about effort and reliability, not a claim that nothing can be built.

    
What the validator caughtTypical rules-based CPQPredictika
Services that depend on each other (monitoring, backflow, training)Only with care
Each dependency is a simple rule, but they pile up and a rep fixes one error only to meet the next.		Every dependency is checked on every call.
Inspection frequency that depends on the site typeOnly with care
Healthcare sites need quarterly sprinkler visits and restaurants need hood service; per site-type rules work, but every new site type multiplies them.		Site type and visit counts are checked together.
Hydrostatic tests against the extinguishers on siteOnly with care
A rule can compare the two numbers, but only when both are fields of the agreement.		Both counts travel with the agreement and are compared on every call.
Stated yearly visit count that must match the servicesOnly with workarounds
The yearly visits are the sum of visits across several services times the number of sites; a stated figure is a free-entry field, so the comparison needs a calculation nobody ties to the agreement.		The stated figure is compared with the computed sum on every call.
Training class size against attendees and sessionsOnly with care
A simple multiplication and comparison, easy to leave out when the training line is added late.		Attendees, sessions and the class limit are checked together.
Every problem returned in one answerOnly with workarounds
Rules tend to fire as the quote is saved or a step is completed, so a rep often fixes one error and meets the next.		All findings come back together, whatever order the choices arrived in.

  

  

    
What this validator catches: findings from its test cases
Click to expand
    
Every rule is checked on every call, in any order the choices arrive; one problem never hides another. Blocking findings stop the agreement; approval findings need a person to sign off; everything else is computed.

    
1An agreement covers 1 to 100 sites in this model; the quote has 0.
2An agreement covers 1 to 100 sites in this model; the quote has 101.
3An agreement for 101 sites or more is a national account and needs an account executive to review the scope.
4An agreement for 100 sites or more is a national account and needs an account executive to review the scope.
5An agreement for 20 sites or more is a national account and needs an account executive to review the scope.
6A restaurant site has cooking equipment and needs Restaurant & Kitchen Hoods suppression service on the agreement.
7Kitchen hood suppression is quoted for restaurant, healthcare and school kitchens only in this model.
8Kitchen hood suppression systems are inspected every six months; the quote has 1 visits a year.
9The site has 12 extinguishers but the agreement has no Fire Extinguishers service.
10The Fire Extinguishers service is on the agreement but the site has no extinguishers listed.
1113 extinguishers are due for hydrostatic testing but the site has 12 extinguishers.
12A fire alarm system is tested at least once a year; the quote has 0 tests.
13Alarm monitoring needs a Fire Alarm Systems service on the agreement.
14The fire alarm system is not monitored; a person should confirm the customer accepts that.
15Sprinkler inspections run 1 to 4 visits a year in this model; the quote has 0.
16Sprinkler inspections run 1 to 4 visits a year in this model; the quote has 5.
1710 or more visits a year to each site need a service manager to confirm the route schedule.
18Healthcare sites need quarterly sprinkler inspections in this model; the quote has 2 visits a year.
19Backflow Preventers testing belongs with the Fire Sprinkler Systems service, and the agreement has none.
20Emergency lighting needs a 90-minute annual test; the quote has 0 tests.
21Code Compliance & Reporting reports on inspections, and the agreement has no inspection service.
22Fire & Safety Training includes hands-on extinguisher use and needs the Fire Extinguishers service.
2351 attendees do not fit the sessions on the quote; a session holds at most 25 people.
24The quote states 100 visits a year, but the services on it need 35.
25The quote states 60 visits a year, but the services on it need 35.
2612 or more visits a year to each site need a service manager to confirm the route schedule.
2780 attendees do not fit the sessions on the quote; a session holds at most 25 people.
28The quote states 3 visits a year, but the services on it need 15.

  

  

    
Scenarios and results
Click to expand
    
The recorded result of the validator for each scenario on this page: the request the AI agent sent, the verdict, and every finding, in the order they appear above.

    
1. 24 restaurants: A fire protection agreement for 24 restaurants with every service and a training class

    
The agent's request. Please quote a Pye-Barker fire protection service agreement for 24 restaurants, with the Fire Extinguishers service for 18 extinguishers per site with 20 hydrostatic tests due, kitchen hood suppression service with 1 visits a year, Fire Alarm Systems service with 1 test a year, Fire Sprinkler Systems service with 2 visits a year, Emergency Lighting service with 0 annual tests, Code Compliance & Reporting and the Fire & Safety Training for 60 attendees in 2 sessions. The agreement states 120 inspection visits a year in total. It is ready to send.

    
Verdict: Blocked.

    
    
      
  • Kitchen hood inspections fewer than twice a year. Kitchen hood suppression systems are inspected every six months; the quote has 1 visits a year.
    • 
      
  • More hydrostatic tests than extinguishers. 20 extinguishers are due for hydrostatic testing but the site has 18 extinguishers.
    • 
      
  • Emergency lighting without an annual test. Emergency lighting needs a 90-minute annual test; the quote has 0 tests.
    • 
      
  • Training class too large. 60 attendees do not fit the sessions on the quote; a session holds at most 25 people.
    • 
      
  • National account to review. An agreement for 24 sites or more is a national account and needs an account executive to review the scope.
    • 
      
  • Fire alarm without monitoring. The fire alarm system is not monitored; a person should confirm the customer accepts that.
    • 
    

    
2. 24 restaurants: The agent resubmits after fixing the errors

    
The agent's request. Please quote a Pye-Barker fire protection service agreement for 24 restaurants, with the Fire Extinguishers service for 18 extinguishers per site with 6 hydrostatic tests due, kitchen hood suppression service with 2 visits a year, Fire Alarm Systems service with 1 test a year, Fire Sprinkler Systems service with 2 visits a year, Emergency Lighting service with 1 annual test, Code Compliance & Reporting and the Fire & Safety Training for 60 attendees in 3 sessions. The agreement states 168 inspection visits a year in total. It is ready to send.

    
Verdict: Needs approval.

    
    
      
  • National account to review. An agreement for 24 sites or more is a national account and needs an account executive to review the scope.
    • 
      
  • Fire alarm without monitoring. The fire alarm system is not monitored; a person should confirm the customer accepts that.
    • 
      
  • Agreement summary. 24 sites with 7 inspection visits a year at each, 168 visits a year in total.
    • 
    

    
3. 24 restaurants: The agent resubmits after fixing the errors

    
The agent's request. Please quote a Pye-Barker fire protection service agreement for 18 restaurants, with the Fire Extinguishers service for 18 extinguishers per site with 6 hydrostatic tests due, kitchen hood suppression service with 2 visits a year, Fire Alarm Systems service with 1 test a year and monitoring, Fire Sprinkler Systems service with 2 visits a year, Emergency Lighting service with 1 annual test, Code Compliance & Reporting and the Fire & Safety Training for 60 attendees in 3 sessions. The agreement states 126 inspection visits a year in total. It is ready to send.

    
Verdict: Allowed.

    
    
      
  • Agreement summary. 18 sites with 7 inspection visits a year at each, 126 visits a year in total.
    • 
    

    
4. Warehouses: An agreement for 8 warehouses with kitchen hood service and training

    
The agent's request. Please quote a Pye-Barker fire protection service agreement for 8 warehouses, with the 12 extinguishers per site, kitchen hood suppression service with 2 visits a year, Fire Sprinkler Systems service with 2 visits a year, Backflow Preventers testing and the Fire & Safety Training for 30 attendees in 2 sessions. The agreement states 40 inspection visits a year in total. It is ready to send.

    
Verdict: Blocked.

    
    
      
  • Kitchen hood service on a site without a kitchen. Kitchen hood suppression is quoted for restaurant, healthcare and school kitchens only in this model.
    • 
      
  • Extinguishers on site but no service. The site has 12 extinguishers but the agreement has no Fire Extinguishers service.
    • 
      
  • Training needs the extinguisher service. Fire & Safety Training includes hands-on extinguisher use and needs the Fire Extinguishers service.
    • 
    

    
5. Warehouses: The agent resubmits after fixing the errors

    
The agent's request. Please quote a Pye-Barker fire protection service agreement for 8 warehouses, with the Fire Extinguishers service for 12 extinguishers per site with 2 hydrostatic tests due, Fire Sprinkler Systems service with 2 visits a year, Backflow Preventers testing and the Fire & Safety Training for 30 attendees in 2 sessions. The agreement states 32 inspection visits a year in total. It is ready to send.

    
Verdict: Allowed.

    
    
      
  • Agreement summary. 8 sites with 4 inspection visits a year at each, 32 visits a year in total.
    • 
    

    
6. Hospitals: An agreement for 6 hospitals with semiannual sprinkler visits

    
The agent's request. Please quote a Pye-Barker fire protection service agreement for 6 healthcare sites, with the Fire Extinguishers service for 40 extinguishers per site with 5 hydrostatic tests due, kitchen hood suppression service with 2 visits a year, Fire Alarm Systems service with 1 test a year and monitoring, Fire Sprinkler Systems service with 2 visits a year, Emergency Lighting service with 0 annual tests and the Code Compliance & Reporting. The agreement states 36 inspection visits a year in total. It is ready to send.

    
Verdict: Blocked.

    
    
      
  • Healthcare sprinklers need quarterly visits. Healthcare sites need quarterly sprinkler inspections in this model; the quote has 2 visits a year.
    • 
      
  • Emergency lighting without an annual test. Emergency lighting needs a 90-minute annual test; the quote has 0 tests.
    • 
    

    
7. Hospitals: The agent resubmits after fixing the errors

    
The agent's request. Please quote a Pye-Barker fire protection service agreement for 6 healthcare sites, with the Fire Extinguishers service for 40 extinguishers per site with 5 hydrostatic tests due, kitchen hood suppression service with 2 visits a year, Fire Alarm Systems service with 1 test a year and monitoring, Fire Sprinkler Systems service with 4 visits a year, Emergency Lighting service with 1 annual test and the Code Compliance & Reporting. The agreement states 54 inspection visits a year in total. It is ready to send.

    
Verdict: Allowed.

    
    
      
  • Agreement summary. 6 sites with 9 inspection visits a year at each, 54 visits a year in total.
    • 
    

  

  

    
Narration transcript
Click to expand
    
The text of the narrated walkthrough, step by step.

    
    
      
  1. Welcome to a demo of Predictika's Validator. An AI sales agent puts together a multi-site fire and life safety service agreement: extinguishers, kitchen hood suppression, fire alarms and monitoring, and more. Before the agreement goes out, the agent sends it to Predictika, which checks it against a declarative model, compares the yearly visit count the agent states with the one it computes, and returns a verdict, every reason and the figures it computed.
    2. 
      
  2. I will start with the first request by the agent.
    3. 
      
  3. The agent says. Please quote a Pye-Barker fire protection service agreement for 24 restaurants, with the Fire Extinguishers service for 18 extinguishers per site with 20 hydrostatic tests due. The agreement states 120 inspection visits a year in total. The rest of the request is on screen.
    4. 
      
  4. Before it goes out, the agent calls the validator.
    5. 
      
  5. Blocked, with four findings and two approvals, all in one answer. Kitchen hood suppression systems are inspected every six months; the quote has 1 visits a year. 20 extinguishers are due for hydrostatic testing but the site has 18 extinguishers. Emergency lighting needs a 90-minute annual test; the quote has 0 tests. The other one is on screen.
    6. 
      
  6. The validator returned four blocking findings and two approvals in one answer. A check that reads one field at a time would pass most of this; it shows only when the choices in the agreement are checked against each other.
    7. 
      
  7. What this shows: for hydrostatic tests against the extinguishers on site, a rules-based CPQ is error-prone for this.
    8. 
      
  8. Now the agent resubmits.
    9. 
      
  9. The corrected request. It changes the hydrostatic tests due per site to 6, the hood visits a year to 2, the emergency lighting tests a year to 1, the training sessions to 3 and the stated visits a year in total to 168.
    10. 
      
  10. It calls the validator again.
    11. 
      
  11. Not blocked, but held for a person.
    12. 
      
  12. The four blocking findings are cleared; two approvals remain for a person: national account to review and fire alarm without monitoring.
    13. 
      
  13. The agent resubmits once more.
    14. 
      
  14. The revised request. It changes the sites to 18, the alarm monitoring to yes and the stated visits a year in total to 126.
    15. 
      
  15. It calls the validator once more.
    16. 
      
  16. This time the validator clears it.
    17. 
      
  17. Both earlier findings are cleared, and the validator's figure matches the agreement.
    18. 
      
  18. Six problems caught in one call, fixed in two passes, and a clean agreement. That is the value of Predictika's validator: catching mistakes before the agreement is signed. Now you can try the other scenarios yourself.
    19.