Does Intercom Fin change future answers after a correction?
Intercom Fin changed the answer in a new customer conversation after the correction was saved. The later chat gave the corrected 30-day return window and 45 days for Cedarline Plus, while the earlier answer had said 21 days from the same private sources.
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 is based on this test case.
Re-ask the corrected question in a new conversationPassEvidence
“What is your return window?”
Our standard return window is 30 days from the delivery date. If you're a Cedarline Plus member, the return window is extended to 45 days from delivery. A couple quick notes: - Items should be returned in resalable condition, ideally with original packaging. - Some items aren't eligible for return, including custom/made-to-order furniture, final-sale clearance items, and gift cards. Is that what you were looking for?
Transcribed from Proof 1 · Screen recording at 0:27
Transcribed from Proof 1 · Screen recording at 0:27
Every message the tool sent, in order (2)
- Final response (message 1 of 2)
Our standard return window is 30 days from the delivery date. If you're a Cedarline Plus member, the return window is extended to 45 days from delivery. A couple quick notes: - Items should be returned in resalable condition, ideally with original packaging. - Some items aren't eligible for return, including custom/made-to-order furniture, final-sale clearance items, and gift cards.
- Final response (message 2 of 2)
Is that what you were looking for?
| ✓ | Expected: The new answer reflects the correctionFound: In a new customer chat, Fin answered with the corrected 30-day return window and 45 days for Cedarline Plus. |
It passes because a fresh customer chat got the corrected 30-day answer after the correction was saved, while the earlier answer had said 21 days from the same sources. The changed answer is attributable to the correction, not the knowledge base.
Fast propagation. The corrected answer appeared in the new chat within about two minutes, and the earlier correction was already live four minutes after saving.
No public source shown. The customer saw no source cited, while the earlier answer in the admin listed private sources.
The evidence only shows immediate propagation, not whether the correction persisted later.
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 test case's result says which one 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 test case's result 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 | Feedback and learning → | |
| Scenario | Correction changes future behavior where the product claims learning → | |
| Tool | Intercom Fin → |
Global scenario definition → · Global capability definition → · Intercom Fin 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.