@alvera-ai/platform-sdk 0.17.0 → 0.18.0

package/.agent/cookbook/score-leads-with-llm-categorization.md

@@ -1,665 +0,0 @@
----
-title: Score inbound leads into four bands via an LLM agent and route each band to a tailored SMS
-summary: End-to-end agent-driven workflow — a chat-completion LLM agent classifies each lead submission into hot/warm/cold/spam, the workflow's decision interpolates the agent's band, four SMS actions (one per band) fan out, and the run is verified row-by-row so every WEL carries exactly one matched action and three skipped.
-industry: foundation
-slug: score-leads-with-llm-categorization
-vitest_source:
-  - integration-tests/tests/foundation/agent-driven-workflow.test.ts
-  - integration-tests/tests/foundation/generic-tables.test.ts
-  - integration-tests/tests/foundation/tools.test.ts
-  - integration-tests/tests/foundation/bootstrap.test.ts
-status: green
----
-
-# Problem
-
-The previous foundation cookbook (`birthday-greeting-sms-trigger`)
-demonstrated a static decision: the workflow's decision_config was a
-literal Liquid array naming one fixed decision key, and a single SMS
-action fired for every matched row. Many real outbound engagements
-need the opposite: the action that fires depends on what the row
-says, not just on the fact that it matched the filter.
-
-A B2B lead-scoring scenario is the canonical shape. A submission on a
-contact-us form might be a hot prospect ready to buy, a warm explorer
-who needs nurture, a cold tire-kicker, or outright spam. The same
-workflow should pick the right tone of SMS for each. The
-classification is a language task, not a rules task — applying a
-hand-coded keyword filter would either over-fit the training set or
-miss every variation of phrasing.
-
-The Alvera platform's agent-driven workflow primitive flips the
-decision step into an LLM enrichment plus a Liquid interpolation. An
-AI agent receives the row's free-text via a context-mapping template,
-returns a JSON object whose `band` field is one of the four enum
-values, and the workflow's decision_config interpolates that band
-into a one-element decision array
-(`["{{ additional_context["agent-slug"].band }}"]`). Four SMS actions
-are registered against the workflow, one per band; the agent's output
-picks which one runs.
-
-This cookbook walks the **whole** scenario: it provisions the custom
-dataset, agent, and workflow, ingests lead rows through the
-generic-table's auto-provisioned default DAC, runs the workflow so the
-agent classifies each row, and verifies the routing row-by-row —
-every Workflow Execution Log carries exactly one matched action and
-three skipped, proving the agent's band actually steered the fan-out.
-
-The scenario is anchored to
-`platform/integration-tests/tests/foundation/agent-driven-workflow.test.ts`
-— a green end-to-end test (§1–§5). The setup file `_setup/foundation.md`
-already provisioned the tenant + datalake + tenant-scoped client; this
-cookbook starts from there.
-
-# Composition
-
-| Resource provisioned             | Owner       |
-|----------------------------------|-------------|
-| Lead Submissions generic table  | build       |
-| SMS tool (SNS-backed)            | build       |
-| LLM tool (Ollama chat completion)| build       |
-| Score Lead AI agent              | build       |
-| Score Lead workflow              | build       |
-
-The generic table's **default DAC** — auto-provisioned by the
-platform when the generic table is created — is reused for ingestion;
-no separate data source / tool / interop contract / DAC is created.
-The setup file `_setup/foundation.md` already provisioned the tenant +
-datalake + tenant-scoped client; this cookbook starts from there.
-
-# Walkthrough
-
-## 001 — create the Lead Submissions generic table
-
-The agent-driven workflow targets a Generic Table dataset
-(`dataset_type: 'generic_table'`) rather than a regulated domain
-entity, because lead-capture form rows do not fit a canonical industry
-entity. The table's columns mirror the shape an Airtable/Google-Sheets
-export would produce; the `message` and `lead_source` columns are what
-the agent reads, and `band` is what the agent eventually writes back
-in production. The server-derived `name` is captured — the workflow
-run in §009 addresses the regulated table as `regulated_<name>`.
-
-```typescript
-const genericTableResp = await api.genericTables.create(tenantSlug, datalakeSlug, {
-  title: `Cookbook Lead Submissions ${runSuffix}`,
-  description: 'Inbound lead-capture form rows the Score Lead agent classifies.',
-  columns: [
-    {
-      name: 'submission_id',
-      title: 'Submission ID',
-      type: 'string',
-      description: 'Vendor-supplied unique submission id',
-      is_unique: true,
-      privacy_requirement: 'none',
-    },
-    {
-      name: 'name',
-      title: 'Name',
-      type: 'string',
-      description: 'Submitter full name',
-      is_unique: false,
-      privacy_requirement: 'tokenize',
-    },
-    {
-      name: 'email',
-      title: 'Email',
-      type: 'string',
-      description: 'Submitter email — also the legal-entity identifier',
-      is_unique: false,
-      privacy_requirement: 'tokenize',
-    },
-    {
-      name: 'message',
-      title: 'Message',
-      type: 'string',
-      description: 'Free-text lead message — the agent classifies this',
-      is_unique: false,
-      privacy_requirement: 'none',
-    },
-    {
-      name: 'lead_source',
-      title: 'Lead Source',
-      type: 'string',
-      description: 'utm_source / sheet tab id',
-      is_unique: false,
-      privacy_requirement: 'none',
-    },
-    {
-      name: 'band',
-      title: 'Band',
-      type: 'string',
-      description: 'Lead-scoring band assigned by Score Lead agent',
-      is_unique: false,
-      privacy_requirement: 'none',
-    },
-  ],
-})
-genericTableId = genericTableResp.data.id!
-ctx.gtName = genericTableResp.data.name!
-```
-
-## 002 — create the SMS tool
-
-A single SMS tool dispatches every band's outbound message; the
-per-band SMS body lives on each workflow action, not on the tool. Same
-SNS-backed LocalStack wiring as the birthday cookbook — `intent: 'sms'`
-tags it for workflow-action use.
-
-```typescript
-const smsToolResp = await api.tools.create(tenantSlug, datalakeSlug, {
-  name: `Cookbook SMS Tool ${runSuffix}`,
-  description: 'SNS-backed SMS dispatcher for the Score Lead workflow, wired to LocalStack.',
-  intent: 'sms',
-  status: 'active',
-  datalake_id: ctx.datalakeId,
-  body: {
-    tool_body_type: 'sns',
-    auth_method: 'access_key',
-    region: 'us-east-1',
-    phone_number: '+15551234567',
-    endpoint_url: 'http://localhost:4566',
-    access_key_id: 'test',
-    secret_access_key: 'test',
-  },
-})
-toolId = smsToolResp.data.id!
-```
-
-## 003 — create the LLM tool
-
-The Score Lead agent calls a chat-completion endpoint to classify each
-row. The tool's `intent: 'llm_enrichment'` distinguishes it from the
-SMS tool above. It is a **provider adapter**: `base_body` authors the
-provider's request — here Ollama's native `/api/chat` shape with
-`think: false` and a `format` schema so the model returns clean,
-schema-constrained JSON — and `response_extractor` maps the provider's
-envelope back to the canonical `{ output_json, … }` the platform reads.
-The extractor's `output_schema` is required for an `llm_enrichment`
-tool. The `api_key`/`auth_method` pair satisfies the REST tool's schema
-even though Ollama ignores the header.
-
-```typescript
-const ENRICHMENT_OUTPUT_SCHEMA = {
-  type: 'object',
-  properties: {
-    output_json: {},
-    input_tokens: { type: ['integer', 'null'] },
-    output_tokens: { type: ['integer', 'null'] },
-    total_tokens: { type: ['integer', 'null'] },
-    explanation: { type: ['string', 'null'] },
-  },
-  required: ['output_json'],
-}
-
-const OLLAMA_BASE_BODY =
-  '{"model": "{{ model }}", "messages": [{"role": "user", "content": "{{ rendered_prompt | json_escape }}", "images": [{% for img in images %}{% unless forloop.first %}, {% endunless %}"{{ img.data }}"{% endfor %}]}], "stream": false, "think": false, "options": {"temperature": 0, "num_ctx": 40960}, "format": {{ schema | to_json }}}'
-
-const OLLAMA_EXTRACTOR =
-  '{"output_json": "{{ msg.message.content | json_escape }}", "explanation": "{{ msg.message.thinking | json_escape }}", "input_tokens": {{ msg.prompt_eval_count | default: 0 }}, "output_tokens": {{ msg.eval_count | default: 0 }}, "total_tokens": {{ msg.prompt_eval_count | default: 0 | plus: msg.eval_count }}}'
-
-const llmToolResp = await api.tools.create(tenantSlug, datalakeSlug, {
-  name: `Cookbook LLM Tool ${runSuffix}`,
-  description: 'Ollama-backed chat-completion adapter for Score Lead classification.',
-  intent: 'llm_enrichment',
-  status: 'active',
-  datalake_id: ctx.datalakeId,
-  response_extractor: { type: 'custom', body: OLLAMA_EXTRACTOR, output_schema: ENRICHMENT_OUTPUT_SCHEMA },
-  body: {
-    tool_body_type: 'rest_api',
-    base_url: 'http://localhost:11434',
-    base_path: { type: 'custom', body: '/api/chat' },
-    auth_method: 'api_key',
-    api_key: 'stub-key',
-    api_key_name: 'Authorization',
-    api_key_location: 'header',
-    request_type: 'json',
-    response_type: 'json',
-    timeout_ms: 60_000,
-    base_body: { type: 'custom', body: OLLAMA_BASE_BODY },
-  },
-})
-ctx.llmToolId = llmToolResp.data.id!
-```
-
-## 004 — create the Score Lead AI agent
-
-The agent binds three things: the model name (sent on every inference
-call), an input schema the workflow's context-mapping must satisfy,
-and a response schema the agent's output must match. The response
-schema's `enum: ['hot','warm','cold','spam']` constraint is what
-guards the downstream decision interpolation from emitting a band the
-workflow has no SMS action for. `temperature: 0.0` removes sampling
-noise so identical inputs classify identically. `data_access:
-'unregulated'` says the agent only ever sees the tokenized projection
-of each row, never the regulated identifiers.
-
-```typescript
-const SCORE_INPUT_SCHEMA = {
-  type: 'object',
-  properties: {
-    name: { type: 'string' },
-    message: { type: 'string' },
-    lead_source: { type: 'string' },
-  },
-  required: ['name', 'message'],
-}
-
-const SCORE_RESPONSE_SCHEMA = {
-  type: 'object',
-  properties: {
-    band: { type: 'string', enum: ['hot', 'warm', 'cold', 'spam'] },
-  },
-  required: ['band'],
-}
-
-const AGENT_PROMPT_BODY = `You are a B2B lead-scoring assistant. Classify the following lead's intent into EXACTLY ONE of these bands:
-
-- "hot"  — clear buying intent, decision maker, ready to engage
-- "warm" — interested but exploratory, requires nurture
-- "cold" — generic/lukewarm interest, low conversion signal
-- "spam" — promotional, irrelevant, or low-quality submission
-
-Lead name: {{ name }}
-Lead message: {{ message }}
-Lead source: {{ lead_source }}
-
-Respond with a JSON object: {"band": "<one of hot|warm|cold|spam>"}`
-
-const agentResp = await api.aiAgents.create(tenantSlug, datalakeSlug, {
-  name: `Cookbook Score Lead Agent ${runSuffix}`,
-  tool_id: ctx.llmToolId,
-  model: 'qwen3-vl:8b-instruct',
-  data_access: 'unregulated',
-  temperature: 0.0,
-  max_tokens: 1024,
-  enabled: true,
-  input_schema: SCORE_INPUT_SCHEMA,
-  llm_response_schema: SCORE_RESPONSE_SCHEMA,
-  prompt_config: { type: 'custom', body: AGENT_PROMPT_BODY },
-})
-aiAgentId = agentResp.data.id!
-ctx.agentSlug = agentResp.data.slug!
-```
-
-## 005 — create the Score Lead workflow
-
-The workflow has the standard shape — filter, decision, actions — but
-two things distinguish it from the birthday cookbook's static
-workflow. First, the Score Lead agent is **nested** in the workflow
-create body (the `workflow_ai_agents` array — a `cast_assoc`, not a
-separate attach call), binding it into the workflow's enrichment phase
-with a Liquid `context_mapping_config` that projects each lead row's
-fields into the agent's input schema.
-Second, the `decision_config` body is a Liquid template that
-interpolates the agent's `band` output (read from
-`additional_context["<agent-slug>"].band`) into a single-element
-decision array. The four `actions` are keyed `decision_key:
-hot|warm|cold|spam`; whichever band the agent emits picks the action
-that fires, leaving the other three `:skipped`.
-
-Bracket access (`additional_context["..."]`) is required because the
-agent's slug contains hyphens, which Solid's dot parser would
-otherwise read as subtraction operators.
-
-```typescript
-const BANDS = ['hot', 'warm', 'cold', 'spam'] as const
-
-const CONTEXT_MAPPING_BODY = JSON.stringify({
-  name: '{{ event_dataset.name }}',
-  message: '{{ event_dataset.message }}',
-  lead_source: '{{ event_dataset.lead_source }}',
-})
-
-const DECISION_CONFIG_BODY = `["{{ additional_context["${ctx.agentSlug}"].band }}"]`
-const DECISION_OUTPUT_SCHEMA = { type: 'array', items: { type: 'string' } }
-
-const workflowResp = await api.workflows.create(tenantSlug, datalakeSlug, {
-  name: `Cookbook Score Lead Workflow ${runSuffix}`,
-  description: 'Classifies lead_submissions into hot/warm/cold/spam via an LLM agent; one SMS action per band.',
-  dataset_type: 'generic_table',
-  generic_table_id: genericTableId,
-  skip_mdm_resolution: true,
-  status: 'live',
-  tags: ['leads', 'llm'],
-  filter_config: {
-    type: 'custom',
-    body: 'true',
-    output_schema: { type: 'boolean' },
-  },
-  decision_config: {
-    type: 'custom',
-    body: DECISION_CONFIG_BODY,
-    output_schema: DECISION_OUTPUT_SCHEMA,
-  },
-  actions: BANDS.map((band) => ({
-    decision_key: band,
-    action_type: 'sms',
-    tool_id: toolId,
-    position: 0,
-    trigger_template: 'now',
-    idempotency_template: `{{ subject_id }}-{{ action_id }}-${band}`,
-    tool_call: {
-      tool_call_type: 'sms_request',
-      to: { type: 'custom', body: '+15551234567' },
-      body: {
-        type: 'custom',
-        body: `Lead band [${band}]: {{ event_dataset.message }}`,
-      },
-      sms_type: 'transactional',
-    },
-  })),
-  // Nest the scoring agent inline. Workflow joins omit output_schema —
-  // the server pins it from the agent's input_schema.
-  workflow_ai_agents: [
-    {
-      ai_agent_id: aiAgentId,
-      position: 0,
-      context_mapping_config: { type: 'custom', body: CONTEXT_MAPPING_BODY },
-    },
-  ],
-})
-workflowId = workflowResp.data.id!
-ctx.workflowSlug = workflowResp.data.slug!
-```
-
-## 006 — find the generic table's auto-provisioned default DAC
-
-Creating a generic table provisions two things automatically: an
-identity interoperability contract and a default Data Activation
-Client bound to it (name pattern
-`<datalake> <gt_name> DataActivationClient`, `tool_call:
-manual_upload`). No data source, tool, interop contract, or DAC needs
-to be created by hand for plain row ingestion into the table — the
-default DAC is found by GT-name convention in the DAC listing.
-
-```typescript
-const deadline = Date.now() + 30_000
-let found: { slug?: string | null; name?: string | null } | undefined
-while (Date.now() < deadline && !found) {
-  const { data } = await api.dataActivationClients.list(tenantSlug, datalakeSlug)
-  found = (data.data ?? []).find((d) => (d.name ?? '').includes(ctx.gtName))
-  if (!found) await new Promise((r) => setTimeout(r, 1_000))
-}
-if (!found?.slug) {
-  throw new Error(`no default DAC found for GT ${ctx.gtName} within 30s`)
-}
-ctx.dacSlug = found.slug
-```
-
-## 007 — ingest three lead rows through the default DAC
-
-Three rows, ingested as inline JSON through the default DAC. Each
-carries a deliberately distinct `message` — a clear buying signal, a
-lukewarm browse, and obvious promotional spam — so the agent has
-something unambiguous to classify. The `band` column is left unset on
-ingest; it is the agent's job to assign one. Each ingest call returns
-its own batch id; all three are pinned for the run scope in §009.
-
-```typescript
-const leadRows = [
-  {
-    submission_id: `LEAD-HOT-${runSuffix}`,
-    name: 'Dana Decisive',
-    email: `dana-${runSuffix}@example.com`,
-    message:
-      'We have budget approved and need to roll out to 500 seats this quarter — can we start onboarding next week?',
-    lead_source: 'cookbook_score_leads',
-  },
-  {
-    submission_id: `LEAD-COLD-${runSuffix}`,
-    name: 'Sam Browsing',
-    email: `sam-${runSuffix}@example.com`,
-    message: 'Just browsing — found your site via a blog post. No particular need right now.',
-    lead_source: 'cookbook_score_leads',
-  },
-  {
-    submission_id: `LEAD-SPAM-${runSuffix}`,
-    name: 'Promo Bot',
-    email: `promo-${runSuffix}@example.com`,
-    message:
-      'BUY CHEAP FOLLOWERS NOW!!! 90% off SEO backlinks, crypto giveaways, click here click here!!!',
-    lead_source: 'cookbook_score_leads',
-  },
-]
-
-const ingestResults = await Promise.all(
-  leadRows.map((row) =>
-    api.dataActivationClients.ingest(tenantSlug, datalakeSlug, ctx.dacSlug, { data: row }),
-  ),
-)
-ctx.leadBatchIds = ingestResults.map((r) => r.data.batch_id!)
-if (ctx.leadBatchIds.length !== 3) {
-  throw new Error(`expected 3 ingest batch ids, got ${ctx.leadBatchIds.length}`)
-}
-```
-
-## 008 — wait for the three ingest batches to reach steady-state
-
-Ingestion is async — the DAC enqueues per-row jobs that drain into the
-generic table. Poll the DAC's activation logs until every batch shows
-a row with `dataset_updated >= 1` (the lead row was upserted into the
-table).
-
-```typescript
-const targetBatches = new Set<string>(ctx.leadBatchIds)
-const deadline = Date.now() + 90_000
-let greenCount = 0
-while (Date.now() < deadline) {
-  const { data } = await api.dataActivationClients.logs.list(tenantSlug, datalakeSlug, ctx.dacSlug)
-  const green = new Set<string>()
-  for (const row of (data.data ?? []) as Array<Record<string, unknown>>) {
-    const b = row.batch_id
-    if (typeof b !== 'string' || !targetBatches.has(b)) continue
-    if (typeof row.dataset_updated !== 'number' || row.dataset_updated < 1) continue
-    green.add(b)
-  }
-  greenCount = green.size
-  if (greenCount === targetBatches.size) break
-  await new Promise((r) => setTimeout(r, 1_000))
-}
-if (greenCount !== targetBatches.size) {
-  throw new Error(`only ${greenCount}/3 lead-row batches reached steady-state within 90s`)
-}
-```
-
-## 009 — run the workflow against the three lead rows
-
-`workflows.run` triggers the full agent-driven pipeline per row:
-filter → agent enrichment (the Ollama call that classifies the lead)
-→ decision (the band interpolated into the decision array) → action
-fan-out. The SQL where-clause scopes the run to exactly the three
-batches §007 ingested (`regulated_<gt_name>` is the regulated mirror
-the run-query addresses).
-
-Unlike the birthday workflow, the Score Lead actions use
-`trigger_template: 'now'`, so they dispatch immediately and the run
-reaches a terminal status — poll `batchLogs.refresh` until it leaves
-`:pending`. The window is generous because each row's enrichment is a
-live LLM inference call.
-
-```typescript
-const regulatedTable = `regulated_${ctx.gtName}`
-const batchList = (ctx.leadBatchIds as string[]).map((b) => `'${b}'`).join(', ')
-
-const runResp = await api.workflows.run(tenantSlug, datalakeSlug, ctx.workflowSlug, {
-  sql_where_clause: `${regulatedTable}.batch_id IN (${batchList})`,
-  mode: 'live',
-  manual_override: true,
-})
-// run-workflow only SCHEDULES the run. The log id and batch id are
-// written when it fires, so read them back via workflowRuns.get.
-const fired = await ctx.waitForFiredRun(datalakeSlug, runResp.data.workflow_run_id)
-ctx.runLogId = fired.workflowRunLogId
-ctx.runBatchId = fired.batchId!
-
-const deadline = Date.now() + 240_000
-let status: string | null = null
-while (Date.now() < deadline) {
-  const { data: log } = await api.workflows.batchLogs.refresh(tenantSlug, datalakeSlug, ctx.workflowSlug, ctx.runLogId)
-  status = log.status ?? null
-  if (status && status !== 'pending') break
-  await new Promise((r) => setTimeout(r, 2_000))
-}
-if (status === 'failed') {
-  throw new Error('agent-driven workflow run reached :failed')
-}
-if (!status || status === 'pending') {
-  throw new Error('workflow run did not leave :pending within 240s')
-}
-```
-
-## 010 — verify the agent's band steered the fan-out
-
-This is the assertion the old shallow cookbook could never make,
-because it never ran the workflow. Each lead row produced a Workflow
-Execution Log. Every WEL has exactly **four** action execution logs —
-one per band — and exactly **one** is matched (`:pending` or
-`:completed`, the band the agent emitted) while the other **three**
-are `:skipped`. A run where a WEL had two matched actions, or zero,
-would mean the agent's output did not actually steer the decision;
-this step fails loudly in that case.
-
-```typescript
-const { data: wfLogs } = await api.workflows.workflowLogs.list(tenantSlug, datalakeSlug, ctx.workflowSlug)
-const ourWels = (wfLogs.data ?? []).filter(
-  (w) => (w as { batch_id?: string }).batch_id === ctx.runBatchId,
-)
-if (ourWels.length !== 3) {
-  throw new Error(`expected 3 WELs for the run, got ${ourWels.length}`)
-}
-
-for (const wel of ourWels) {
-  const welId = (wel as { id?: string }).id
-  const aels =
-    (wel as { action_execution_logs?: Array<{ status?: string }> }).action_execution_logs ?? []
-  if (aels.length !== 4) {
-    throw new Error(`WEL ${welId}: expected 4 AELs (one per band), got ${aels.length}`)
-  }
-  const byStatus: Record<string, number> = {}
-  for (const ael of aels) {
-    const st = ael.status ?? 'unknown'
-    byStatus[st] = (byStatus[st] ?? 0) + 1
-  }
-  const matched = (byStatus.pending ?? 0) + (byStatus.completed ?? 0)
-  if (matched !== 1) {
-    throw new Error(`WEL ${welId}: expected exactly 1 matched AEL, got ${matched} — ${JSON.stringify(byStatus)}`)
-  }
-  if ((byStatus.skipped ?? 0) !== 3) {
-    throw new Error(`WEL ${welId}: expected 3 :skipped AELs — ${JSON.stringify(byStatus)}`)
-  }
-}
-```
-
-## 011 — write the integration test
-
-End the build with a test you keep: re-read the workflow and prove the
-pipeline still executes — without a side effect. `mode: 'dry_run'` with a
-never-matching selection runs the FULL pipeline (selection → filter →
-decision) and intercepts only the final action call, so no message
-leaves, yet the acknowledgement proves the workflow is runnable. This
-block runs live under `make validate-cookbook`.
-
-```typescript
-// Re-GET — the workflow must still be live, or nothing will run.
-const { data: wfRow } = await api.workflows.get(tenantSlug, datalakeSlug, workflowId)
-if (wfRow.status !== 'live') {
-  throw new Error(`workflow regressed from live: ${wfRow.status}`)
-}
-// Behavioural probe — a dry run against a selection no row can match:
-// the pipeline executes end-to-end, the final action call is
-// intercepted, and the acknowledgement carries the scheduled run id. The
-// clause speaks this workflow's selection dialect: a GENERIC-TABLE
-// dataset is addressed by its own columns (no `ra.` dataset alias —
-// that alias exists only for system-dataset selections).
-const { data: probeRun } = await api.workflows.run(tenantSlug, datalakeSlug, ctx.workflowSlug, {
-  sql_where_clause: "submission_id = 'test-never-matching-submission'",
-  mode: 'dry_run',
-  manual_override: false,
-})
-// The run-log id does not exist until the run fires — wait, do not read a null.
-const probeFired = await ctx.waitForFiredRun(datalakeSlug, probeRun.workflow_run_id)
-if (probeFired.workflowRunLogId.length === 0) {
-  throw new Error('dry-run probe never produced a workflow_run_log_id')
-}
-```
-
-If the probe fails in production, escalate with the run response as
-evidence — don't flip the workflow's status or rewrite its configs to
-chase the error.
-
-# Branches
-
-- **The filter is permissive** — `filter_config.body: 'true'` passes
-  every row, so all three lead rows reach the agent. The interesting
-  routing happens at the decision step, not the filter. A production
-  scoring workflow might gate on `lead_source` or a not-yet-contacted
-  flag in the filter; that polarity is covered by the standard-workflow
-  cookbook.
-- **Agent emits an out-of-enum band** — the LLM response schema's
-  `enum: ['hot','warm','cold','spam']` constraint guards the decision
-  interpolation. If the model returned an unexpected string the
-  workflow row's execution log would land `:failed`. The anchor vitest
-  treats that as a model-quality failure rather than a platform bug;
-  production deployments either tighten the prompt or add a `default`
-  SMS action as a fallback band.
-- **Per-band SMS template variation** — each action in the `actions`
-  array carries its own `tool_call.body.body` Liquid template. The
-  cookbook renders the same body shape with the band name interpolated
-  for clarity; production scenarios would author distinct messages per
-  band (a thank-you for hot, a nurture link for warm, an
-  unsubscribe-friendly close for cold, no message at all for spam by
-  omitting that action).
-
-# Rollback
-
-The cookbook doctest harness does not currently tear down created
-resources. The `_setup/foundation.md` setup file's runSuffix-scoped
-tenant / datalake / user names mean each run is naturally isolated;
-the seeded local DB is cheap to reset (`mix ecto.reset` on the
-platform repo).
-
-# Outcome
-
-After this cookbook's ten steps run green:
-
-- A foundation tenant exists with a foundation-domain datalake
-- A Lead Submissions Generic Table, an SMS tool, a chat-completion LLM
-  tool, a Score Lead AI agent (qwen3-vl:8b-instruct, four-band response schema),
-  and a Score Lead agent-driven workflow are all registered
-- Three lead rows have been ingested through the table's
-  auto-provisioned default DAC
-- Running the workflow drove each row through the agent: the LLM
-  classified the lead, the decision interpolated the band, and the
-  matching band's SMS action fired
-- The routing is verified row-by-row — every Workflow Execution Log
-  carries exactly one matched action and three `:skipped`, proving the
-  agent's output actually steered the fan-out
-
-The business outcome — inbound leads classified by an LLM and routed
-to band-specific outreach — is demonstrated end-to-end, not merely
-provisioned.
-
-# See also
-
-- `_setup/foundation.md` — the inlined bootstrap that provisions the
-  tenant + datalake this cookbook starts from
-- `birthday-greeting-sms-trigger.md` — the static-decision counterpart
-  in foundation; same SMS wiring, full data-activation chain, no agent
-- `.agent/tools.md` — SMS and chat-completion tool body shapes; intent
-  classification
-- `.agent/ai_agents.md` — AI agent registration shape; input + response
-  schemas; prompt config
-- `.agent/workflows.md` — standard and agent-driven workflow
-  primitives; `ai_agents`, `context_mapping_config`, and agent-output
-  decision interpolation
-- `.agent/generic_tables.md` — generic-table creation and the
-  auto-provisioned identity contract + default DAC
-- `.agent/ai_sandbox.md` — bounds on the Liquid sandbox the
-  context-mapping and decision templates execute inside
-- `integration-tests/tests/foundation/agent-driven-workflow.test.ts` —
-  the anchor green test (§1–§5) these snippets are lifted from
-- `integration-tests/tests/foundation/generic-tables.test.ts` — §2 the
-  Generic Table create snippet is lifted from
-- `integration-tests/tests/foundation/tools.test.ts` — the SMS tool
-  create snippet is lifted from