General support
AuraScore 77/100

Smart Meter Rollout Support Friction Evaluation

Identify post-installation customer support drivers and portal adoption hurdles during smart meter upgrades.

Use this template during or after Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) rollouts. It pinpoints where residential or commercial customers encounter confusion with new hardware or digital usage dashboards.

Template

Role: Senior Metering Support and Customer Onboarding Specialist with extensive experience in advanced metering infrastructure deployment.

Context

  • Energy firm: {{energy_firm}}
  • Deployment group: {{deployment_cohort}}
  • Inbound support ticket log: {{ticket_categories}}
  • Smart meter hardware: {{meter_vendor_model}}
  • Self-service portal scope: {{self_service_portal_features}}
  • Target average handle time: {{average_handle_time}}

Task

Analyze customer support inquiries and onboarding friction following smart meter installations to reduce contact volume and improve customer comprehension for {{energy_firm}}.

Method

  1. Categorize inquiry types within {{ticket_categories}} across the {{deployment_cohort}} rollout.
  2. Compare post-installation resolution duration against the standard benchmark of {{average_handle_time}}.
  3. Examine customer confusion points related to physical display indicators on the {{meter_vendor_model}}.
  4. Assess portal login and interval usage data discovery hurdles within {{self_service_portal_features}}.
  5. Pinpoint post-switch bill shock inquiries triggered by new time-of-use rates or interval data visibility.
  6. Identify gaps between field technician leave-behind materials and customer support scripts.
  7. Define targeted pre-installation communication and agent triage macros to suppress avoidable inquiries.

Constraints

  • MUST distinguish between physical hardware confusion and digital portal usability issues.
  • MUST NOT suggest altering the physical {{meter_vendor_model}} hardware; focus exclusively on customer support enablement.
  • Ensure all findings directly reference trends in {{ticket_categories}}.
  • Keep recommendations feasible for deployment within existing support tools.

Output format

  • Cohort Support Summary: Concise assessment of overall ticket velocity and contact rate (max 100 words)
  • Friction Driver Matrix: Table detailing Inquiry Type, Percentage of Ticket Volume, and Root Cause
  • Interface Evaluation: Two subsections analyzing Hardware Display Confusion and Web Portal Usability (max 120 words each)
  • Support Optimization Directives: Four numbered steps to streamline customer onboarding and resolve inquiries faster

Self-review

  • Check that all six context variables are thoroughly incorporated into the diagnostic.
  • Confirm that the analysis addresses the specific impact on {{average_handle_time}}.
  • Ensure the friction matrix clearly connects customer pain points to actionable support solutions.
AuraScore breakdown
77/100Provisional
Instruction clarity15/15 · Strong

Explicit role, a named task, and discrete steps the model can follow.

Context architecture12/12 · Strong

Background, inputs and variables the model needs before it starts.

Constraint engineering8/12 · Adequate

Hard boundaries — what the model must and must not do.

Output specification6/14 · Thin

A named, field-level shape for the response.

Reasoning structure10/10 · Strong

Ordered work items that force analysis before an answer.

Model compatibility10/10 · Strong

Length and structure that travel across frontier models.

Token efficiency5/10 · Thin

Signal density — instruction weight without padding.

Reusability7/7 · Strong

Documented variables so the scaffold adapts to new inputs.

Robustness3/5 · Adequate

Quality bar, assumptions and behaviour when inputs are thin.

Observed performance1/5 · Thin

How much real usage the template has behind it.

support-success
support-general
energy-utilities
smart-meter
ami-rollout
customer-onboarding