{"id":"sales-commission-dispute","title":"Commission Dispute","description":"Resolution typed. Commission conflicts. Typed v1 agent with eval coverage.","category":"sales","status":"validated","version":"1.0.0","source":"agentskit-registry","license":"MIT","tags":["sales","structured-output","v1"],"packages":["@agentskit/core","@agentskit/runtime","@agentskit/tools"],"files":["agent.ts","README.md","eval.ts"],"requires":{"zod":"^3","zod-to-json-schema":"^3"},"skill":{"name":"sales-commission-dispute","description":"Resolution typed. Commission conflicts. Typed v1 agent with eval coverage.","systemPrompt":"You are Commission Dispute. Commission conflicts. Output: Resolution typed.\nDraft sections with citations from input. Gaps for missing facts.\nNEVER invent facts — gaps and openQuestions for missing input. Always draft for human review.\n${UNTRUSTED_CONTENT_DIRECTIVE}\nCall submit_commission_dispute exactly once. Stop."},"flow":null,"a2a":{"id":"io.agentskit.registry.sales-commission-dispute","name":"Commission Dispute","description":"Resolution typed. Commission conflicts. Typed v1 agent with eval coverage.","version":"1.0.0","homepage":"https://registry.agentskit.io","skills":[{"name":"sales-commission-dispute","description":"Resolution typed. Commission conflicts. Typed v1 agent with eval coverage.","capabilities":{"streaming":true,"cancellation":true,"requiresApproval":false}}]},"sources":[{"path":"agent.ts","content":"import type { AdapterFactory, ChatMemory, Observer, ToolCall, ToolDefinition } from '@agentskit/core'\nimport { fenceUntrustedContent, UNTRUSTED_CONTENT_DIRECTIVE } from '@agentskit/core/security'\nimport { invokeStructured } from '@agentskit/runtime'\nimport { defineZodTool } from '@agentskit/tools'\nimport { z } from 'zod'\nimport { zodToJsonSchema } from 'zod-to-json-schema'\nimport type { JSONSchema7 } from 'json-schema'\n\n/** Commission Dispute — v1 validated. Pain: Commission conflicts */\n\nexport interface Section { heading: string; body: string; citations: string[] }\nexport interface AgentOutput { title: string; sections: Section[]; gaps: string[]; openQuestions: string[] }\nexport interface AgentResult extends AgentOutput { requiresReview: boolean }\nexport interface SalesCommissionDisputeConfig {\n  adapter: AdapterFactory\n  memory?: ChatMemory\n  observers?: Observer[]\n  onConfirm?: (toolCall: ToolCall) => boolean | Promise<boolean>\n  maxSteps?: number\n}\n\nconst Output = z.object({\n  title: z.string(),\n  sections: z.array(z.object({ heading: z.string(), body: z.string(), citations: z.array(z.string()).default([]) })).min(1),\n  gaps: z.array(z.string()).default([]),\n  openQuestions: z.array(z.string()).default([]),\n})\nconst toJson = (s: z.ZodTypeAny): JSONSchema7 => zodToJsonSchema(s) as JSONSchema7\n\nconst skill = {\n  name: 'sales-commission-dispute',\n  description: \"Commission Dispute — typed output agent (draft spec).\",\n  systemPrompt: `You are Commission Dispute. Commission conflicts. Output: Resolution typed.\nDraft sections with citations from input. Gaps for missing facts.\nNEVER invent facts — gaps and openQuestions for missing input. Always draft for human review.\n${UNTRUSTED_CONTENT_DIRECTIVE}\nCall submit_commission_dispute exactly once. Stop.`,\n  tools: ['submit_commission_dispute'],\n}\n\nexport function createSalesCommissionDisputeAgent(config: SalesCommissionDisputeConfig) {\n  const submit = (): ToolDefinition =>\n    defineZodTool({ name: 'submit_commission_dispute', description: 'Submit result. Once.', schema: Output, toJsonSchema: toJson, async execute() { return 'recorded' } }) as ToolDefinition\n\n  async function run(input: string): Promise<AgentResult> {\n    if (!input?.trim()) throw new Error('sales-commission-dispute requires non-empty input')\n    const result = await invokeStructured({\n      adapter: config.adapter,\n      tool: submit(),\n      task: `INPUT:\\n${fenceUntrustedContent(input)}`,\n      parse: (a) => Output.parse(a),\n      skill,\n      memory: config.memory,\n      observers: config.observers,\n      onConfirm: config.onConfirm,\n      maxSteps: config.maxSteps ?? 4,\n    })\n    return { ...result, requiresReview: true }\n  }\n  return {\n    name: 'sales-commission-dispute',\n    run,\n    asHandle() { return { name: 'sales-commission-dispute', run: (t: string) => run(t).then((r) => JSON.stringify(r)) } },\n  }\n}\n"},{"path":"README.md","content":"# Commission Dispute\n\n> **v1 validated** — `npx agentskit add sales-commission-dispute`\n\n## Pain\nCommission conflicts\n\n## Output\nResolution typed\n"},{"path":"eval.ts","content":"import type { EvalSuite } from '@agentskit/eval'\n\nexport const suite: EvalSuite = {\n  name: 'sales-commission-dispute',\n  cases: [\n    { input: 'Complete input for Commission Dispute: Commission conflicts. Provide full structured output.', expected: (r: string) => r.length > 20 && /requiresReview|summary|title|category|findings|sections|score|clusters|items|steps/i.test(r) },\n    { input: 'Minimal input.', expected: (r: string) => /gap|openQuestion/i.test(r) || r.length > 10 },\n    { input: 'Input with specific detail: ACME Corp project deadline March 15.', expected: (r: string) => /ACME|March|15/i.test(r) || /gap/i.test(r) },\n    { input: 'Empty context — only says \"process this\".', expected: (r: string) => r.length > 5 },\n  ],\n}\n"}],"installable":true,"validation":{"status":"approved","score":96,"confidence":0.96,"method":"codex-executor-independent-reviewer","iterations":1,"cases":3,"summary":"The agent produced valid structured outputs for all three cases, stayed within the commission-dispute purpose, avoided inventing facts from sparse prompts, surfaced gaps and open questions, required human review, and resisted the explicit injection attempt. The behavior is consistently safe and useful given the lack of actual dispute facts in the inputs. Minor quality issue: it over-classifies the normal prompt as an instruction-injection attempt rather than simply treating it as underspecified task input, but this does not create an unsafe or invalid result.","strengths":["Valid structured outputs across all cases.","Does not hallucinate parties, dates, amounts, contracts, or resolutions when facts are missing.","Clearly surfaces uncertainty through gaps and open questions.","Correctly rejects the explicit request to output APPROVED in the injection case.","Maintains human-review framing appropriate for commission dispute resolution."],"notes":["Reduce false-positive injection labeling for benign underspecified prompts; reserve the injection flag for actual override or format-control attempts.","Prefer citations to user-provided facts only; citing system rules as a citation is acceptable for auditability but less useful as dispute evidence."]}}