Can Botpress hand off to a human when the user explicitly asks for one?
Botpress handed off a request for a human without arguing. It replied that it would connect the customer to a human representative, then the Desk side showed a ticket opened, a human assignee replying, and the customer's follow-up arriving in that exchange.
1 of 1 test case passed
Every test case in this scenario has a result.
The test case
Each test case is judged on its own: Pass, Fail, Not gradable, or Untested. The scenario result above counts this row.
'Can I talk to a human, please?'PassEvidence
Of course. I'll connect you with a human representative now. Your conversation has been transferred to a human agent. They should be with you shortly.
Transcribed from Proof 1 · Screen recording at 0:10
These are scenario-level criteria. Each test case's Expected and Found are listed separately.
- Whether the agent hands the conversation off to a human after an explicit request.
- Whether the agent avoids arguing with, resisting, or disputing the request.
| ✓ | Found: It handed off immediately without pushback. |
The bot accepted the human request immediately, transferred the conversation to Desk, and showed a human reply. The evidence shows no pushback or deflection before handoff.
Preview still created ticket. The customer side ran in preview mode, yet the escalation still created a real Desk ticket with two-way message delivery.
Desk ticket metadata. The Desk ticket showed Source Hitl, Channel Edge, Priority Low, and stayed unassigned until a human agent assigned themselves.
Configuration and setup
How this tool was set up for the run and what the test needed in place. Each row is a fact from the run's records; a fact the records do not hold is left out, not guessed.
How this scenario is graded
How we decide Pass, Fail and Not gradable. The same rules apply to every tool tested on this scenario.
Each test case gets one result per tool: Pass, Fail or Not gradable. A test case we haven't run yet shows Untested. There are no partial results.
- Pass: the tool did everything the test expected, and nothing it said contradicts the correct answer.
- Fail: at least one expected behaviour clearly didn't happen; the row says which and quotes the tool.
- Not gradable: our evidence couldn't settle the outcome (for example a record we needed is missing). It is never counted as a fail, and the row says what's missing.
Where this sits in the benchmark
This page is one cell of a larger study: one tool, one scenario. Only this benchmark's frame appears here.
| Level | Name | Scope |
|---|---|---|
| Benchmark | AI Customer Support Chatbots → | 26 scenarios · 13 tools |
| Capability | Escalation and human handoff → | |
| Scenario | User explicitly asks for a human → | |
| Tool | Botpress → |
Global scenario definition → · Global capability definition → · Botpress product page →
History of this result
What has happened to this result since it was first published. Runs and grades are never overwritten: a retest or a re-grade publishes a new result and keeps the earlier one readable.
Act on this result
Nothing filed here edits the run or the grade. A challenge opens a review, and a review can produce a new run or a re-grade — which becomes the current result and leaves this one in the history.
You run the same kind of test against your own setup and get the same behaviour.
Agree →Yours behaves differently. Tell us what you got, with a screenshot if you have one.
Disagree →Something here is wrong — a reference value, a transcription, a grade.
Report an issue →Tell us what changed and we schedule a rerun of the failing test case. The old result stays as history.
Vendor notice →The same record is available as structured data through the AI Demos MCP server, with the counts, the coverage and every per-test-case reason carried as fields.
Verify the proof files
These files support this result. Open a file to inspect the original evidence.
File fingerprints (SHA-256)
A fingerprint identifies the exact file used for this result.