Ship AI fast without letting support bugs churn your customers

Prompt drift, schema mismatches, hallucinated tool calls, your AI fails in fuzzy ways that surface in support tickets first. With no dedicated triage engineer, those bugs sit for days and customers quietly leave. Watari maps each ticket to the prompt, schema, or function that broke, drafts the fix, and closes the loop with the customer.

Slow fixes on AI bugs cost you customers, not just hours

AI products carry non-deterministic failure modes: prompt drift, schema mismatches, hallucinated tool calls, model-version regressions. Every one surfaces in the support inbox before your dashboards catch it. With a small team and no dedicated triage engineer, those tickets pile up, the customer waits, and trust erodes faster than the bug itself. And the file the model named in its output is rarely the file that needs to change, so even the hunt is slow.

Read the LLM output, not a paraphrase.

Your customers screenshot the broken chat, not the stack trace. Watari reads every attachment in the ticket (chat transcripts, structured-output JSON, broken tool calls), preserves the verbatim text untouched, parses structured fields, and emits a bug grounded in what the customer actually saw.

LLM-output aware
Chat transcripts, JSON blobs, tool-call traces parsed as evidence.
Verbatim preserved
Customer quotes survive extraction; nothing is paraphrased into the bug report.
Structured fields
Severity, repro steps, and expected vs actual pulled into a typed schema.
Customer verbatim
LLM output · screenshot attached

The chat agent invented a tool call that does not exist in my org. I asked "what is my balance" and instead of using the read_balance tool it hallucinated a "transfer_funds" tool and returned a confirmation that looked legit. I have a screenshot of the message and the agent transcript attached. Tool: transfer_funds (hallucinated: not in our schema)

The chat agent invented a tool call that does not exist in my org. Screenshot attached.
What the customer reported, kept in their own words beside the bug Watari wrote up from it.

Prompts mapped like code.

A prompt edit that ships a regression is just as load-bearing as a function edit, and your map needs to know that. Watari indexes prompts, system messages, schemas, and eval fixtures and maps them the same way as your TypeScript or Python, so a prompt-driven regression maps to a prompt file, not a guess at the call site.

Prompts indexed
.md, .txt, and prompt template files indexed alongside code.
Schemas indexed
JSON schemas, Zod, and Pydantic models mapped the same way as your code.
Eval fixtures indexed
Fixtures and golden files become candidate map targets, not noise.
Where it happens
#1Strong match
prompts/router.prompt.mdsystem prompt: tool schema

router prompt fails to constrain tool names to the declared whitelist

#2Possible match
src/ai/tool-schema.tsTOOL_DEFINITIONS

transfer_funds is described in docs but never registered in the live schema

Where it happens: the file and function behind the bug, with how sure Watari is of each match.

Real failure log, flakes flagged.

Non-deterministic model output makes CI fail in ways a synthetic repro can’t reach. Watari follows up on the draft PR against the real failure log. Flaky failures are flagged to engineers instead of retried forever.

Failure-log driven
Your CI failure log steers the follow-up commit.
Flakes flagged
Flaky failures are flagged to engineers instead of retried forever.
Reviewer follow-up
Reviewer comments that ask for a change get a follow-up commit.
Checks on the pull request
passing
  • lint4.2s
  • typecheck18.7s
  • test46.1s
  • build2m12s

Flaky failure · flagged to engineers

Flaky failures are flagged to engineers instead of retried forever.

Your own CI checks running on the draft pull request.
We run Watari on our own support queue. Eat your own cooking.

14d

Free trial of Growth. 3 repositories, 10 Mapped Issues. No card.

Trial policy

7d

Mismapped credit window

Billing model

0.7

Dual confidence gate

Billing model

Frequently asked questions

Does Watari work on LLM SDK code?

Yes. Tool definitions, message construction and streaming handlers are indexed like any other code.

How does Watari handle prompts and system messages as source?

Prompts, system messages, and schemas are indexed alongside your code and mapped the same way as your code. A prompt edit that ships a regression maps the same way a code edit does: the draft PR opens against the prompt file, the diff is focused, and CODEOWNERS routes the prompt-domain reviewer.

Can Watari debug LLM-output-related bugs?

Yes. Watari reads the LLM output the customer screenshotted, parses structured fields, and surfaces hallucinated tool calls or schema mismatches as concrete bug reports. The map then routes to the prompt, schema, or guardrail that needs the change.

What about non-deterministic test failures from model output?

Your CI failure log steers the follow-up commit, not a synthetic repro. Flaky failures are flagged to engineers instead of retried forever, so engineers get a real signal.

Do you store our prompts?

Prompts are indexed inside your own isolated tenant so the mapper can find them. They are never used to train models. Indexed data stays in your isolated workspace, protected by row-level security.

When a support ticket reports a bug, your engineers get a drafted fix.

Connect your help desk or your issue tracker, then GitHub or Azure DevOps. Watari maps each bug to the exact file and function in your code and drafts the fix as a pull request your CI checks.

14 days free. No card. Cancel any time.