AI CSAT: 7 AI Support Agents That Track Quality (2026)

Created time

Sep 30, 2026 05:56 AM

Title length (<60)

Author

Mike Heap

Last optimised

Oct 5, 2026

Ecomm?

What does tracking CSAT and quality on AI conversations actually require?

⚡

TL;DR: Five things: CSAT on the AI's conversations kept apart from your team's, a rating for the conversations nobody surveyed, checks on whether each answer was right and on policy, a fair comparison with your team, and a way to fix what scored low.

Each job below is one your team would otherwise do by reading tickets.

1. It shows CSAT for the AI's conversations, separate from your team's

If the AI's CSAT is mixed into your team's number, you can't tell which half is pulling the average down. The harder case is a conversation the AI started and a person finished. A good tool states whose rating that is.

If the survey goes out while the customer is still waiting for a person, the score mostly reflects that wait. I treat an AI CSAT figure the way I treat a resolution rate: it only means something if the customer can reach a person easily. Our guide to customer service metrics covers the CSAT formula itself.

2. It rates the conversations where nobody answered the survey

Most customers never answer a satisfaction survey. A feedback vendor's guide puts the most common survey response rate at around 15%, so most of your AI's conversations tell you nothing.

A tool that rates every AI conversation, and shows the reason for each rating, closes that gap. I read the reason first, because "2 out of 5" with no explanation sends you straight back to the transcript.

3. It checks every AI answer against your standards

A customer can be delighted with a refund the AI promised outside your policy. A tool that does this job checks each answer for being correct, complete, on policy and in the right tone, against criteria your team sets.

Vendors call this auto QA, AI scorecards or automatic quality checks. For each tool, I checked whether it reviews the AI's live conversations, after launch, against criteria you write.

4. It measures the AI against your human team on the same terms

This is the job that tells you whether the AI is as good as your team. You find out by rating the AI and your team on the same scale, against the same criteria, split by topic. A billing dispute and a password reset shouldn't share one average.

With that in place, you can hand the AI the topics where it matches your team and keep people on the rest.

5. It helps you fix what scored low

A low score only helps if someone sees it and can act on it. I look for a tool that brings low-rated conversations and topics to your attention with the reason, then lets you fix the help article, instruction or answer behind them.

If you have to find the bad conversations by reading, the rating has saved you no time. For resolution rate and the other numbers worth tracking on the AI, our guide to AI customer service KPIs covers them.

How does customer service QA change when an AI agent answers the ticket?

Customer service QA used to mean a person scoring a sample of human replies and using the results to coach. Manual QA samples 2% to 5% of tickets, because a person can only read so many. That works for coaching a team, where the same habits repeat across a week.

With an AI answering, every conversation can be checked, because a machine does the reading. When we built our inspection tools, most of the wrong answers customers reported traced back to a help article that was wrong or out of date. So you check the content of each answer and whether it followed your policy, and fix any failure in your help content or the AI's instructions.

A tool that covers fewer than three of these five jobs gives you a satisfaction number with no way to tell whether the AI's answers are any good. Fixing what scored low is the job most of the seven tools do well, scoring 8 or more out of 10. Keeping the AI's CSAT separate and measuring the AI against your team are the two jobs the fewest tools do that well.

Bar chart of how many of the seven tools score 8 or more out of 10 on each job: CSAT for the AI kept apart 2, a rating on every conversation 3, every answer checked 3, AI measured against your team 2 and low scores turned into fixes 4.

How did I score these AI agents for CSAT and quality tracking?

⚡

TL;DR: Seven criteria scored out of 10: the five jobs above, plus whether it works inside the helpdesk you already run and what it costs a month at 2,000 tickets with the quality features switched on.

The seven criteria are the five jobs plus helpdesk fit and monthly cost, each scored out of 10 for a total out of 70. Evidence comes from each vendor's help docs, pricing pages and customer stories, and for My AskAI from our published docs and pricing page. A feature on a higher plan or an add-on only counts if the cost row pays for it, so every quality score has its price in the cost column.

I sorted the seven tools into three kinds, because where the AI is installed decides who rates its conversations:

AI agents that install into the helpdesk you already run - My AskAI, Fini and eesel AI, each rating the conversations it handles.

AI built into a helpdesk - Intercom Fin, Zendesk and Gorgias AI Agent, rated by that helpdesk's CSAT and QA tools.

A helpdesk that sells AI-scored CSAT and QA as per-seat add-ons - Front.

Here are the criteria:

CSAT on AI-handled conversations - the AI's satisfaction score, kept apart from your team's, with a stated rule for handed-over conversations.

A rating for every AI conversation - conversations with no survey answer still get a rating, with the reason visible.

Quality checks on every AI answer - answers checked for being correct, complete, on policy and in the right tone, against criteria your team can set.

AI measured against your team - the same rating and criteria for AI and human conversations, split by topic.

Turning low scores into fixes - low-rated conversations surfaced with the reason, and a route to fix what caused them.

Works in the helpdesk you already run - the AI and its quality tracking work inside your current helpdesk.

Monthly cost at 2,000 tickets - the cheapest plan that covers the volume and switches on the quality features scored.

If you're still choosing a vendor and want to test answer quality before you buy, our guide to the AI customer service performance gap covers those tests.

How do the 7 AI agents compare on AI CSAT and quality at a glance?

⚡

TL;DR: Intercom Fin leads on 55 of 70 because its Pro add-on covers all five jobs. My AskAI is second on 52 with a rated reason on every conversation at the lowest price, and eesel AI is third on 45 for testing against past tickets.

Here's how the seven tools scored on each criterion:

(scores out of 10)	Intercom Fin	My AskAI	eesel AI	Front	Zendesk AI agents	Gorgias AI Agent	Fini
CSAT on AI-handled conversations	8	6	4	6	7	8	6
A rating for every AI conversation	9	9	7	9	6	4	5
Quality checks on every AI answer	9	5	5	8	8	5	5
AI measured against your team	9	5	5	7	8	6	5
Turning low scores into fixes	9	9	8	5	6	8	6
Works in the helpdesk you already run	7	9	9	4	4	4	9
Monthly cost at 2,000 tickets	4	9	7	4	2	6	5
Overall (out of 70)	55 (79%)	52 (74%)	45 (64%)	43 (61%)	41 (59%)	41 (59%)	41 (59%)

Same seven criteria, in plain words, with the cost row assuming the AI resolves 1,200 of the 2,000 tickets:

Criterion	Intercom Fin	My AskAI	eesel AI	Front	Zendesk AI agents	Gorgias AI Agent	Fini
CSAT on AI-handled conversations	Survey after Fin conversations	AI rating, AI conversations only	AI rating, no survey	Combined with teammates' CSAT	Messaging only, skips escalations	Two AI CSAT counts	Per-conversation CSAT via API
A rating for every AI conversation	CX Score with reason	Every conversation, reason shown	AI CSAT on live work	Cites the messages behind it	Category scores only	Manual Bad/Okay/Good	Sentiment scoring per conversation
Quality checks on every AI answer	Team-written scorecards, AI-scored	Team-scored tests before launch	Simulation on past tickets	Custom criteria, one scorecard	Custom prompt categories	Three fixed criteria	Policy-checked answers
AI measured against your team	One scale for both	AI drafts beside team replies	Versus past team replies	One scorecard for both	Same categories, bot and agent	Agents versus helpdesk average	Vendor-claimed CSAT delta
Turning low scores into fixes	Topics, trends, content suggestions	Lowest AI CSAT first, Echo	Suggested instruction changes	Rules act on scores	Escalation dashboard	Coaching, suggestions, CSAT digest	Thumbs-down, escalation reasons
Works in the helpdesk you already run	Zendesk, Salesforce, HubSpot, Freshworks	Zendesk, Intercom, Freshdesk, Gorgias, HubSpot	Zendesk, Freshdesk, Intercom, Gorgias, more	Front only	Zendesk only	Gorgias only	Zendesk, Intercom, Front, Salesforce, more
Monthly cost at 2,000 tickets	$1,406.50 with Pro	$379 on Pro	$999 credit plan	$1,530 with add-ons	$2,350 plus QA	$1,099 AI line	$1,068 plus plan fee

Which AI agent scores highest for AI CSAT?

Intercom Fin scores highest, because its Pro add-on does all five jobs. It sends a survey after Fin's conversations and gives every closed Messenger and email conversation a CX Score with a reason. Your team writes the scorecards, Fin and teammates share one scale, and topic reports point at fixes. Its cost score of 4 holds it back, because the add-on is billed on every customer conversation, on top of Fin's charge per outcome.

My AskAI is second on 52, level with Fin on rating every conversation and on turning low scores into fixes. We're ahead on helpdesk fit, and on cost at $379 a month. eesel AI is third on 45, strongest on testing the AI against your past tickets. Front on 43 is the pick for a team already on Front that wants AI and human quality on one scorecard.

Chart of overall score out of 70 against monthly cost at 2,000 tickets: My AskAI 52 at $379, Intercom Fin 55 at $1,406.50, eesel AI 45 at $999, Front 43 at $1,530, Gorgias AI Agent 41 at $1,099, Fini 41 at $1,068 or more and Zendesk AI agents 41 at $2,350 or more.

Where does CSAT and quality tracking on AI conversations go wrong?

⚡

TL;DR: Three ways: the AI's CSAT counts conversations a person finished, the few customers who answer the survey stand in for everyone, and resolution goes up while satisfaction goes down.

Test for all three in any demo before you buy.

Three questions to ask in a demo and the answer to look for: how handed-over conversations are counted (a stated rule), whether conversations nobody surveyed get a rating (a rating on every conversation, with any low rating opened to its reason) and whether resolution and CSAT show together (side by side, with a person easy to reach).

Failure mode 1: The AI's CSAT counts conversations a person finished

A conversation gets handed over, a person sorts it out, and the customer rates it 5. If the report doesn't say whose 5 that is, the AI takes credit for your team's work, or your team takes the blame for a bad AI start.

Gorgias's metrics docs define two AI CSAT figures (one includes handed-over tickets, the other counts only tickets the AI finished), so one account can show two different AI CSAT numbers for the same month. Good looks like a stated rule: Intercom's CX Score for Fin, for example, counts only conversations Fin handled alone.

Failure mode 2: The few customers who answer the survey stand in for everyone

With around 15% of customers answering a typical survey, a rating reflects the people motivated enough to reply. A wrong answer that nobody complained about is never seen, and the customer who got bad advice about a return window leaves.

The fix is a rating on every conversation, with any low rating opened to its reason, so you find the wrong answer without reading every ticket. Our guide to AI hallucination covers how a wrong help article turns into a wrong answer.

Failure mode 3: Resolution goes up while satisfaction goes down

An AI tuned to keep conversations away from people raises its resolution number, while the customers it should have handed over rate it badly or stop replying. One operator described exactly that in a thread on chatbot best practices:

"deflection rate is the vanity metric of support. we were at 65% deflection and 4.1 csat and thought we were winning until we cohorted users who chatted with the bot vs users who didnt; the chatbot cohort churned 18% higher at 60 days."

Read resolution and CSAT side by side, and keep a person easy to reach. The last few points of resolution you win by making handover harder cost you customers. Our AI resolution rate benchmarks show what a realistic rate looks like.

Can My AskAI track CSAT and quality on its AI conversations?

⚡

TL;DR: My AskAI gives every AI conversation an AI CSAT score with a one-sentence reason, and sorts answers by topic so your team fixes the lowest-rated first. It works inside the helpdesk you already have, lets your team check its answers as internal notes before it replies to customers, and costs $379 a month at 2,000 tickets.

We run as an AI agent inside Zendesk, Intercom, Freshdesk, Freshchat, Gorgias and HubSpot, installed as the approved marketplace app. Every conversation our AI handles gets an AI CSAT score in Insights, so the rating covers 100% of the AI's conversations.

The My AskAI homepage, pitching an AI customer service agent that works inside your helpdesk, with a red Create AI Agent button.

How does My AskAI track CSAT and quality end to end?

A separate AI model gives every conversation and ticket a score from 1 to 5, with a one-sentence reason. Our Insights docs publish the instructions that model follows, including when it leaves the score blank, such as spam or a clarifying question the customer never answered. Click any conversation and you see why it got its score.

Video preview — AI Customer Support Analytics

From there, your team reviews and fixes answers in three places:

Echo - our in-dashboard assistant, where your team asks why the agent answered the way it did and which source it used.

Insights - sorts the AI's answers by topic so your team starts with the lowest AI CSAT, and emails you when a new topic appears.

The internal note in your helpdesk - has links to inspect the conversation and add Guidance or a Custom Answer straight from the ticket.

Before go-live, every integration starts in internal notes mode. The AI writes its reply as an internal note, and your agent sees it next to the reply they send. On our Testing and QA page, your team can also score test questions before launch, marking whether they'd send each response to a customer.

An AI Agent internal note, marked Internal, with links to inspect this conversation, add guidance, create custom answers and continue drafting AI replies.

We score 9 on rating every AI conversation because every conversation gets a score and a reason. Front's Smart CSAT goes one step further and cites up to three excerpts from the conversation as the evidence for each rating. We also score 9 on fixes, because the lowest-rated answers come to you sorted by topic and Echo explains each one. The tenth point needs a report of which of your team's criteria fail most often, which Fin's reports show.

We score 6 on CSAT for AI-handled conversations: ours is an AI rating on every AI conversation, kept apart from your team's. Fin and Gorgias score 8 because they survey customers after the AI's conversations.

That 6 still puts us above eesel AI, because our model rates how satisfied the customer was at the end of each conversation, with a published rule for when a score is left blank. eesel's docs describe its AI CSAT as an AI's rating of the agent's answers, for use as an internal quality signal.

On quality checks we score 5. Fin, Front and Zendesk score higher because they check answers against criteria teams write. We cover that job with team-scored tests before launch, internal notes during rollout and the lowest-rated answers first after it.

On AI against your team we score 5, because internal notes put the AI's draft beside your agent's reply during rollout. Gorgias scores 6 with a report comparing each agent with the helpdesk average, and Fin, Zendesk and Front rate the AI and your team on one scale. Helpdesk fit scores 9 and loses its tenth point because you read our AI CSAT and its reasons in Insights, our dashboard.

How does My AskAI handle the 5 things a support team needs?

Here's where we stand on each job:

Job	My AskAI
CSAT on the AI's conversations	⚠️ AI rating on every AI conversation, kept apart from the team's
A rating for every AI conversation	✅ 1 to 5 score with a one-sentence reason
Checks on every AI answer	⚠️ team-scored tests before launch, internal notes during rollout
AI measured against your team	⚠️ AI drafts beside team replies in internal notes
Fixing what scored low	✅ lowest AI CSAT first by topic, Echo explains why

Who's using My AskAI?

YouGarden runs us in Freshdesk and reports a 78% AI CSAT score across 11,785 tickets. TravelJoy, on Zendesk, reports 86% AI CSAT over the last 30 days and 77% over the last 365 days.

Edel Optics started in internal-note mode to check the AI's answers, then switched to direct replies on Zendesk, and now reports 92% AI CSAT across 4,067 tickets a month. RecruitCRM, a SaaS platform for recruitment agencies, reports 75% AI CSAT on its Intercom tickets.

How does My AskAI price for 2,000 tickets a month?

Our Pro plan is $199 a month including 1,000 credits, then $0.12 per extra credit. A typical chat ticket uses about 1 credit and a typical email ticket about 1.5, so 1,000 chats and 1,000 emails come to about 2,500 credits. That's $199 plus 1,500 × $0.12, or $379 a month, the lowest bill in the set and the reason for our 9 on cost. The missing point is the $180 of usage past the 1,000 credits Pro includes, and eesel AI's 2,500-credit plan covers all 2,000 tickets inside its monthly price.

Insights, Inspect and Echo carry no add-on charge. Add-ons bill on top only where you use them: AI Tagging is $0.05 per attribute per ticket, and Tasks and Tools have separate per-use rates. You pay per ticket the AI works on, resolved or not, so the bill doesn't climb as the AI gets better.

Our 30-day free trial has every feature unlocked, unlimited tickets and no card, so you can watch AI CSAT on your own tickets before you pay.

✅

Choose My AskAI for AI CSAT and quality tracking if:

You want a rated reason on every AI conversation inside Zendesk, Intercom, Freshdesk, Freshchat, Gorgias or HubSpot.

You want your team to review the lowest-rated answers by topic and fix them from the ticket.

You want to check the AI's answers as internal notes before it replies to customers.

You want the lowest monthly price in this set at 2,000 tickets.

❌

Don't choose My AskAI for AI CSAT and quality tracking if:

Your QA process depends on scoring every live AI conversation against a scorecard your team writes.

You want AI and human CSAT side by side on one in-product dashboard.

You're looking to replace your helpdesk as well as add AI to it.

For more on My AskAI, read our internal notes page, our helpdesk integrations page or our pricing page.

Can Intercom Fin track CSAT and quality on its AI conversations?

⚡

TL;DR: Intercom Fin's Pro add-on rates every closed Messenger and email conversation with a CX Score and a reason, and scores answers against criteria your team writes, for Fin and teammates alike. It fully covers all 5 jobs and costs $1,406.50 a month at 2,000 tickets with Pro.

Fin is Intercom's AI agent, and it also works with Zendesk, Salesforce, HubSpot and Freshworks. Its quality tools all come with the Pro add-on, and the Pro add-on article is blunt about it: "Note: CX Score is not available without the Pro add-on."

The Intercom homepage, offering a complete system for human and AI customer service, with Start free trial and View demo buttons.

How does Intercom Fin track CSAT and quality end to end?

Fin CSAT is a survey sent only after interactions with Fin, reported as a separate metric. It goes out after a positive reply, at handover to a teammate, or when the customer goes quiet. The Fin CSAT article adds: "Note: Fin CSAT is currently not available over Zendesk tickets."

CX Score rates every closed Messenger and email conversation from 1 to 5, "along with a summary that highlights key moments and explains why each score was given." For Fin's figure it counts only conversations "handled exclusively by Fin, without any human agent involvement", the clearest handover rule I saw in this set. Phone conversations aren't scored.

Intercom's CX Score drill-in view filtered to Fin AI Agent conversations rated 4 to 5, with one conversation showing a CX Score of 5 and a written reason for the rating.

Monitors pick which conversations to review: a random sample, low CX Scores or suspected policy breaches. Scorecards hold your team's criteria, scored by AI or by hand, with weights, must-pass criteria and a pass mark. I like that you describe each criterion in plain words and the AI scores against that description, showing its reasoning.

One CX Score model rates Fin and teammate conversations, and Monitors split Fin reviews from teammate reviews. CX Score breaks down by topic, with trend reports and content suggestions pointing at what to fix. That earns Fin a 9 on four of the five jobs.

Each of those jobs has a gap that Fin's docs state. CX Score doesn't rate phone conversations, so they get no rating and never reach the topic reports, which costs a point on rating every conversation and on fixes. Scorecards score only the conversations a Monitor picks (a random sample or a targeted set). On another helpdesk, conversations have to be imported into Intercom before CX Score can compare Fin with your team.

Its 8 on CSAT for AI-handled conversations comes from the survey not running over Zendesk tickets. Helpdesk fit scores 7 for the import step CX Score needs on another helpdesk.

How does Intercom Fin handle the 5 things a support team needs?

With the Pro add-on, Fin covers all five jobs:

Job	Intercom Fin
CSAT on the AI's conversations	✅ survey after Fin conversations, separate metric
A rating for every AI conversation	✅ CX Score with a written reason
Checks on every AI answer	✅ Monitors and team-written Scorecards
AI measured against your team	✅ one model for Fin and teammates
Fixing what scored low	✅ CX Score by topic, trends, suggestions

Who's using Intercom Fin?

Mony Group uses Insights and CX Score together, and in its customer story the team says:

"With Insights and CX Score, we’re now receiving meaningful, actionable feedback across the board."

How does Intercom Fin price for 2,000 tickets a month?

Fin on the helpdesk you already run is $49 a month including 50 outcomes, then $0.99 per outcome. I've assumed the AI resolves 60% of tickets, or 1,200 outcomes, which brings Fin's charge to $1,187.50.

Pro is $99 a month for up to 1,000 customer conversations, then $0.12 each up to 5,000, and it counts Fin and teammate conversations alike. At 2,000 conversations that's $219, for a total of $1,406.50 a month. Fin scores 4 on cost because both charges rise with volume, one per outcome and one per customer conversation.

On Zendesk, My AskAI gives every AI conversation a score and a reason as the approved app, at $379 a month at this volume.

✅

Choose Intercom Fin for AI CSAT and quality tracking if:

You run Intercom and want Fin and your teammates rated on one scale.

You want AI to score conversations against criteria your team writes, with its reasoning.

You want low CX Scores grouped by topic so you know what to fix first.

❌

Don't choose Intercom Fin for AI CSAT and quality tracking if:

You need Fin CSAT surveys on Zendesk tickets.

You'd rather not pay a per-conversation add-on on top of per-outcome pricing.

You need phone conversations rated.

For more on Intercom Fin, read our complete guide to Fin, our roundup of Fin alternatives or our comparison of My AskAI and Fin.

Can Zendesk track CSAT and quality on its AI conversations?

⚡

TL;DR: Zendesk collects a satisfaction rating on its messaging AI agents, and the separately sold Zendesk QA can score AI agent conversations on the same categories as your team. It fully covers 2 of the 5 jobs, and the AI charge alone is $2,350 a month at 2,000 tickets before Zendesk QA.

Zendesk splits this across two products. AI agent reporting, with a satisfaction rating Zendesk calls BSAT, comes with Team plans and up, and checking answers against criteria needs the Zendesk QA add-on. So I priced two purchases before a Zendesk team sees the AI's quality: the AI agents, at a published per-resolution rate, and Zendesk QA, whose help article lists no price.

The Zendesk homepage, pitching AI that moves beyond deflection to deliver real resolutions.

How does Zendesk track CSAT and quality end to end?

BSAT is a 1 to 5 rating asked inside the AI agent's conversation, for messaging AI agents, and it shows on the AI agent dashboard by use case. When a conversation goes to a person, "BSAT replies associated with a trigger aren't sent", so a handed-over conversation doesn't count against the AI. I like that rule, because a customer who was waiting for a person would be rating the wait. Voice AI agents aren't covered.

Zendesk QA "automatically detects your Zendesk AI agents on messaging and voice channels", and "If autoscoring is turned on, bots are reviewed automatically." Once you set up a scorecard for them, bots can be scored on the same categories as human agents. On top of those, AI insights let you write extra quality checks in plain words, with up to 10 active per account. A bot dashboard compares the bot with an average agent and flags escalations, repeated answers and negative sentiment.

Zendesk QA's Review this conversation panel with a bot, MBot, as the reviewee, thumbs ratings for clarity, solution and next steps, and Auto QA categories for greeting, closing, grammar, empathy, solution offered, tone and readability.

I scored Zendesk 8 on quality checks and 8 on AI against your team, because bots and people can share one set of categories and you can add more. Neither reaches 9, because Fin's Scorecards add weights, must-pass criteria and a pass mark, and one CX Score rates Fin and teammates alike.

Its 7 on CSAT for AI-handled conversations reflects BSAT covering messaging only, with voice AI agents outside it. I scored rating every conversation at 6, since the pages show category scores per bot conversation with no satisfaction rating and reason. Fixes also score 6, since the dashboard shows where the bot struggles and leaves the fixing to your team.

How does Zendesk handle the 5 things a support team needs?

Zendesk's coverage splits between BSAT and Zendesk QA:

Job	Zendesk AI agents
CSAT on the AI's conversations	⚠️ BSAT on messaging AI agents, skips escalations
A rating for every AI conversation	⚠️ QA category scores on bot conversations
Checks on every AI answer	✅ Zendesk QA categories plus custom prompts
AI measured against your team	✅ same categories for bots and agents
Fixing what scored low	⚠️ dashboard of escalations and sentiment

Who's using Zendesk?

Vagaro uses Zendesk's AI agent, and its customer story reports its overall CSAT going up after the launch.

How does Zendesk price for 2,000 tickets a month?

Zendesk charges per automated resolution: $2.00 pay-as-you-go or $1.50 committed, with 5 included per agent each month on Suite Team. At 1,200 AI resolutions with 5 agents, that's 1,175 × $2.00, or $2,350 a month ($1,762.50 on the committed rate). Helpdesk fit scores 4, because the AI and Zendesk QA both run inside Zendesk only.

Zendesk QA is bought on your Subscription page or through sales, and Zendesk's help article on buying it lists no price. With the monthly total open until you ask, Zendesk takes the lowest cost score here, a 2.

If your AI answers email too, My AskAI rates every chat and email conversation with a reason, inside Zendesk as the approved app.

✅

Choose Zendesk for AI CSAT and quality tracking if:

You're on Zendesk and want bots and agents scored on the same QA categories.

You want to write quality checks in plain words.

You already pay for Zendesk QA for your human team.

❌

Don't choose Zendesk for AI CSAT and quality tracking if:

You want a published price for the QA add-on before you talk to sales.

Your AI answers email and you need a satisfaction rating on those conversations.

You run a helpdesk other than Zendesk.

For more on Zendesk, read our complete guide to Zendesk's AI agents, our Zendesk AI alternatives roundup or our comparison of My AskAI and Zendesk AI.

Can Gorgias AI Agent track CSAT and quality on its AI conversations?

⚡

TL;DR: Gorgias reports AI CSAT by topic and by skill, and Auto QA comes with the AI Agent subscription, scoring three fixed criteria with comments. It fully covers 2 of the 5 jobs, runs only inside Gorgias and costs $1,099 a month in AI charges at 2,000 tickets on Pro.

Gorgias is a helpdesk built around Shopify stores, and AI Agent is its built-in AI. Everything I cover here works only inside Gorgias, so helpdesk fit scores 4.

The Gorgias homepage, pitching conversations that drive revenue and not just resolutions, with Discover pricing and Book a demo buttons.

How does Gorgias AI Agent track CSAT and quality end to end?

Gorgias gives you two AI CSAT figures, and its metrics docs explain the difference. The AI Agent report counts every ticket where the AI sent at least one reply: "Unlike the CSAT metrics in the Support Performance and Quality reports (which only count tickets where AI Agent is the last assignee), this metric includes tickets that AI Agent handed over." AI CSAT is also shown per topic and per skill.

Auto QA is "Available on all Helpdesk plans with an AI Agent subscription". AI scores three criteria (resolution completeness, communication and language), four more are scored by hand, and custom criteria aren't available. "When the AI scores a ticket, it will also provide comments justifying the score." Social and voice tickets aren't scored, and the doc asks for at least one agent message.

Leads and admins can rate an AI conversation Bad, Okay or Good in the AI Feedback tab, and thumbs on its sources change which ones it picks next time. Opportunities suggests fixes, and Gaia, Gorgias's AI teammate (in beta and free for now), can send a weekly CSAT digest.

A Gorgias conversation answered by Gorgias AI, with the AI Feedback tab open beside Auto QA, where a reviewer rates it Bad, Okay or Good, can pick what went wrong and gives each source used a thumbs up or down.

I scored Gorgias 8 on CSAT for AI-handled conversations because its docs state which tickets each of its two AI CSAT figures counts, and it shows figures by topic. It misses a 9 because the two figures are in different reports and give two AI CSAT numbers for the same month. It scores 8 on fixes for that coaching loop, short of a 9 because Opportunities and Gaia are both still in beta.

Its 4 on rating every conversation reflects survey answers plus manual Bad, Okay or Good ratings. Quality checks score 5 because the three AI-scored criteria are fixed. AI against your team scores 6 because the Auto QA report compares agents with the helpdesk average, while the Auto QA doc doesn't say whether AI Agent's messages count toward a score.

How does Gorgias AI Agent handle the 5 things a support team needs?

Set against the five jobs, Gorgias AI Agent looks like this:

Job	Gorgias AI Agent
CSAT on the AI's conversations	✅ two AI CSAT counts, by topic and skill
A rating for every AI conversation	⚠️ survey answers plus manual Bad/Okay/Good
Checks on every AI answer	⚠️ Auto QA on three fixed criteria
AI measured against your team	⚠️ agents compared with the helpdesk average
Fixing what scored low	✅ coaching, source feedback, suggested fixes

Who's using Gorgias AI Agent?

bareMinerals reports that its AI shopping assistant beat its human team on CSAT, and its customer story records a "25% increase in CSAT compared to human agents’ already impressive ratings (5.0 vs. 4.6)". Glamnetic reports CSAT between 4.8 and 5.0 on the intents its AI handles, in its story.

How does Gorgias AI Agent price for 2,000 tickets a month?

Gorgias Pro is $550 a month billed monthly: $360 for the helpdesk and $190 for AI Agent, with 2,000 tickets and 190 automated interactions included. Extra interactions on Pro cost $0.90 each, so at 1,200 AI resolutions that's $190 plus 1,010 × $0.90, or $1,099 a month in AI charges, with Auto QA included. I've set the $360 helpdesk fee aside, since you'd pay it with or without the AI. Gorgias scores 6 on cost, because Auto QA comes with the subscription while each resolution past the 190 included adds $0.90.

Where you want a rating with a reason on the tickets nobody surveyed, we score every conversation inside Gorgias, installed as the approved Gorgias app.

✅

Choose Gorgias AI Agent for AI CSAT and quality tracking if:

You run a Shopify store on Gorgias and want AI CSAT by topic and skill.

You want AI quality checks included with the AI subscription.

You want admins to coach the AI straight from a conversation.

❌

Don't choose Gorgias AI Agent for AI CSAT and quality tracking if:

You need quality criteria you write scored by AI.

You need social or voice conversations scored.

You aren't on Gorgias.

For more on Gorgias AI Agent, read our complete guide to Gorgias AI Agent, our comparison of My AskAI and Gorgias AI Agent or our Gorgias AI alternatives roundup.

Can Front track CSAT and quality on its AI conversations?

⚡

TL;DR: Front sells Smart CSAT, which rates conversations nobody surveyed and cites the messages behind each rating, and Smart QA, which checks Autopilot and teammates on one scorecard, as per-seat add-ons. It fully covers 2 of the 5 jobs, runs only inside Front and costs $1,530 a month at 2,000 tickets with both add-ons on 5 seats.

Front is a helpdesk, and Autopilot is its AI agent. Smart CSAT and Smart QA are add-ons on the latest Starter and Professional plans and included in Enterprise. I scored Front 4 on helpdesk fit because Autopilot and both add-ons run only inside Front, so using them means running Front as your helpdesk.

The Front homepage, pitching Front for complex customer operations, with Request demo and Start free trial buttons above a Front inbox mockup.

How does Front track CSAT and quality end to end?

Smart CSAT gives a conversation an AI-inferred rating when the customer hasn't left one. Its help page says: "If a conversation already has a customer CSAT score, a Smart CSAT score will not be created." Each rating comes with a reason and cites up to three excerpts from the conversation, and Front's help page says "Both human agents and AI Autopilot are evaluated." It also says "Only English is officially supported", and the scores can't be edited.

Front's Smart QA and CSAT side panel showing a 3-star Smart CSAT rating with a written reason and a popover citing the messages behind the rating.

Front's CSAT report shows customer-submitted and AI-inferred ratings together or apart, and Autopilot's CSAT sits in the same report as your teammates', according to Front's Smart CSAT help page.

I scored Front 6 on CSAT for AI-handled conversations, because customer ratings and Smart CSAT both cover Autopilot. Fin and Gorgias report the AI's CSAT separately, which earns their 8s.

Smart QA checks conversations, Autopilot's included, against preset criteria, and "You can create up to 10 custom criteria per workspace." One scorecard per workspace puts Autopilot and teammates on the same terms. Rules can act on Smart CSAT scores, and admins can override a QA score.

I gave Front 9 on rating every conversation because every rating cites the messages behind it, and it loses the last point because only English is officially supported. It scores 8 on quality checks for custom criteria on one scorecard, and misses a 9 because the AI's strictness is fixed, where Fin's Scorecards add weights and a pass mark. It scores 7 on AI against your team, since the scale is shared while Autopilot's CSAT stays combined with the team's. I scored fixes at 5: rules act on a score, and the pages show no route from a low score back into what Autopilot knows.

How does Front handle the 5 things a support team needs?

Front's two add-ons cover the jobs like this:

Job	Front
CSAT on the AI's conversations	⚠️ customer and AI-inferred CSAT, combined with teammates'
A rating for every AI conversation	✅ Smart CSAT with cited messages
Checks on every AI answer	✅ Smart QA with up to 10 custom criteria
AI measured against your team	⚠️ one scorecard, no AI-only CSAT report
Fixing what scored low	⚠️ rules act on scores, admins override

Who's using Front?

Podium Education uses Autopilot, and its customer story gives no CSAT or quality figure for it.

How does Front price for 2,000 tickets a month?

Autopilot charges each conversation once, at the highest level it reaches: $0.89 for a resolution, $0.39 for a handoff and $0.05 for triage. "Conversations will only be charged once for the highest automation level achieved," says the Autopilot help page. I've counted the 800 tickets the AI hands over as handoffs, so at 1,200 resolutions that's $1,068 plus $312, or $1,380.

Smart QA is $20 and Smart CSAT $10 per seat per month, so 5 seats add $150, for $1,530 a month with Front's seat prices set aside. The per-seat add-ons on top of a per-conversation AI charge put Front at 4 on cost. Our Front AI pricing guide and Front's pricing page cover the plans in full.

If you'd rather not pay per seat for ratings, My AskAI's AI CSAT, with its reason on every conversation, comes at no extra charge. It works inside Zendesk, Intercom, Freshdesk, Freshchat, Gorgias or HubSpot.

✅

Choose Front for AI CSAT and quality tracking if:

You're on Front and want a rating with cited messages on conversations nobody surveyed.

You want your QA criteria applied to Autopilot and teammates alike.

You want rules to act on low ratings inside Front.

❌

Don't choose Front for AI CSAT and quality tracking if:

You need conversations in languages other than English rated.

You aren't on Front.

You want quality priced without per-seat add-ons.

For more on Front, read our complete guide to Front AI, our comparison of My AskAI and Front or our Front alternatives roundup.

Can Fini track CSAT and quality on its AI conversations?

⚡

TL;DR: Fini connects to Zendesk, Intercom, Front, Salesforce and other helpdesks and charges only for tickets it fully solves, and its API returns CSAT per conversation along with escalation reasons. It covers each of the 5 jobs in part, and its Growth plan's per-resolution charges come to $1,068 a month at 2,000 tickets, plus the plan itself.

Fini is an AI agent that connects to your helpdesk. Its pricing page lists Zendesk, Intercom, HubSpot, Salesforce, Gorgias, LiveChat, Front and Freshdesk among the helpdesks it connects to. That list earns it a 9 on helpdesk fit, and it loses a point because you read its CSAT in Fini's API and dashboards, outside your helpdesk.

The Fini homepage, pitching a self-learning AI agent that resolves support tickets, with Book a demo buttons and four headline stats.

How does Fini track CSAT and quality end to end?

Fini's public API returns CSAT for each conversation and an average CSAT per agent, plus counts of why conversations were escalated. I like having both in one export, because a low rating and the reason a conversation left the AI then appear side by side. Fini's guide says it splits AI-only, AI-assisted and human-resolved CSAT into separate dashboards. A team member's thumbs-down on a conversation changes whether Fini counts it as resolved.

On quality, the Fini homepage says "Every answer scored, and policy-checked." Its trust metrics page defines a CSAT difference against human support and claims "+10% CSAT Delta vs. Human", a figure Fini publishes about itself. Fini's guides also describe sentiment scoring on each conversation.

I scored Fini 6 on CSAT for AI-handled conversations and 6 on fixes, for the per-conversation CSAT and escalation reasons its API returns. CSAT loses points because the separate AI-only dashboards rest on a Fini guide, and fixes lose points because a thumbs-down changes only whether a conversation counts as resolved. Its public pages don't describe criteria your team sets or show a reason beside each rating, so quality checks and rating every conversation each score 5. AI against your team also scores 5, since it rests on a CSAT difference Fini publishes about itself.

How does Fini handle the 5 things a support team needs?

Fini covers each job in part:

Job	Fini
CSAT on the AI's conversations	⚠️ per-conversation CSAT through the API
A rating for every AI conversation	⚠️ sentiment scoring per conversation
Checks on every AI answer	⚠️ answers scored and policy-checked
AI measured against your team	⚠️ vendor-claimed CSAT difference
Fixing what scored low	⚠️ thumbs-down feedback, escalation reasons

Who's using Fini?

Peaksware is one of the customers Fini names, and its case study reports a 12% improvement in CSAT.

How does Fini price for 2,000 tickets a month?

On its Growth plan, Fini charges $0.89 per resolved ticket, and says: "You pay only when Fini fully solves the issue, with no human involved. Escalations to your team are free (and with full context)." At 1,200 resolutions that's $1,068 a month. The page also says "One plan covers the platform, implementation, and a monthly allowance of tickets", at least 2,000 on Growth,

If you want the reason behind each rating on every conversation, we show it in Insights, at $379 a month at this volume.

✅

Choose Fini for AI CSAT and quality tracking if:

You want an AI agent that connects to Zendesk, Intercom, HubSpot, Salesforce, Gorgias, LiveChat, Front or Freshdesk.

You want to pay only for tickets the AI fully solves.

You want CSAT and escalation reasons available through an API.

❌

Don't choose Fini for AI CSAT and quality tracking if:

You want the full monthly price on the pricing page before you talk to anyone.

You want to see how your team sets quality criteria before a demo, since Fini's public pages don't describe it.

You want to read the AI's CSAT without leaving your helpdesk.

For more on Fini, read our complete guide to Fini or our Fini alternatives roundup.

Can eesel AI track CSAT and quality on its AI conversations?

⚡

TL;DR: eesel AI rates every AI conversation with an AI CSAT that its docs call an internal quality signal, and tests the agent against your past tickets before launch. It fully covers 1 of the 5 jobs, installs into Zendesk, Freshdesk, Intercom, Gorgias, HubSpot and Front, and costs $999 a month at 2,000 tickets.

eesel AI is an AI agent that installs into your helpdesk, with its AI CSAT explained in its docs.

The eesel AI homepage, inviting you to hire AI teammates.

How does eesel AI track CSAT and quality end to end?

eesel's Reports page shows an AI CSAT distribution and AI CSAT over time across the agent's live work. The docs describe that number as "an AI's rating of your agent's answers" and as "an internal quality signal", with no customer survey behind it. The Activity view shows the agent's reasoning for each task: "When an answer is wrong, read what your agent searched, found and concluded, then fix the cause."

eesel AI's AI CSAT distribution, described on screen as AI-evaluated quality of the agent's responses rather than real customer ratings, above a gap rate card and a chart of AI CSAT over time.

Simulation "Runs your agent against real past tickets or generated test cases, scores each answer, and suggests instruction changes". You run it before go-live or on demand, with results such as 17 of 20 tickets matching the team's reply quality. eesel also spots patterns in replies your team rejected or edited, and suggests instruction changes from them.

eesel scores 8 on fixes for those suggested changes, and misses a 9 because the suggestions work from Simulation runs and edited replies, where Fin and My AskAI list the lowest-rated live answers. Helpdesk fit scores 9, missing a 10 because the ratings and reasoning stay in eesel's Reports and Activity views.

I scored rating every conversation at 7, since AI CSAT covers live work while the reasoning is in Activity, one task at a time. Its 5s on quality checks and AI against your team reflect Simulation running on past or test tickets, before go-live or on demand. Its 4 on CSAT for AI-handled conversations reflects a rating of the agent's answers, where Fini's API returns CSAT per conversation and My AskAI's model rates how satisfied the customer was.

How does eesel AI handle the 5 things a support team needs?

eesel AI covers one job fully and the rest in part:

Job	eesel AI
CSAT on the AI's conversations	⚠️ AI rating, no customer survey
A rating for every AI conversation	⚠️ AI CSAT across live work
Checks on every AI answer	⚠️ Simulation on past or test tickets
AI measured against your team	⚠️ compared with past team replies
Fixing what scored low	✅ suggested instruction changes

Who's using eesel AI?

smava, a German loan comparison site, uses eesel on Zendesk, and its customer story covers 27,000 loan tickets a month sorted and drafted in German.

How does eesel AI price for 2,000 tickets a month?

eesel sells monthly credit plans, with one credit per ticket or chat. The smallest plan that covers 2,000 tickets is 2,500 credits at $999 a month, with every feature included. eesel scores 7 on cost, with the second-lowest bill in the set, $620 above My AskAI's.

At the same volume, My AskAI is $379 a month, with the reason behind each AI CSAT score one click away in Insights.

✅

Choose eesel AI for AI CSAT and quality tracking if:

You want to test the AI against your past tickets before it goes live.

You want suggested instruction fixes based on what your team edited.

You want an AI agent that installs into Zendesk, Freshdesk, Intercom, Gorgias, HubSpot or Front.

❌

Don't choose eesel AI for AI CSAT and quality tracking if:

You need customer-reported CSAT on the AI's conversations.

You need every live answer checked against criteria.

You want a monthly bill under $500 at 2,000 tickets.

For more on eesel AI, read our complete guide to eesel, our roundup of eesel alternatives or our comparison of My AskAI and eesel.

What does tracking AI CSAT and quality cost at 2,000 tickets a month? (worked example)

⚡

TL;DR: With the AI resolving 1,200 of 2,000 monthly tickets and your team answering the other 800, those 1,200 tickets account for $2,640 of the $4,400 no-AI baseline. Against that, My AskAI saves about $2,261 a month, eesel AI $1,641 and Intercom Fin $1,233.50.

The basis is the same for every row: 2,000 tickets a month, 1,000 chat and 1,000 email. The no-AI row prices a person answering every ticket without AI help, at 5.5 minutes each and $0.40 a minute. I've assumed the AI resolves 60%, or 1,200 tickets, and hands the other 800 to a person, and the AI rows price the AI bill only. Effective $/ticket divides each monthly cost by all 2,000 tickets, rounded to the nearest cent.

Scenario	Monthly cost	Effective $/ticket	Notes
No AI (team answers every ticket)	$4,400 of team time	$2.20	2,000 tickets × 5.5 min × $0.40
My AskAI (Pro)	$379	$0.19	1,000 chat + 1,000 email tickets ≈ 2,500 credits; $199 incl. 1,000 credits + 1,500 × $0.12
Intercom Fin (Fin with your helpdesk + Pro add-on)	$1,406.50	$0.70	1,200 resolved + 800 handed over; $49 incl. 50 outcomes + 1,150 × $0.99; Pro $99 incl. 1,000 conversations + 1,000 × $0.12
eesel AI (2,500-credit plan)	$999	$0.50	2,000 tickets at one credit each, every feature included

Of the $4,400 baseline, the 1,200 tickets the AI resolves account for $2,640, and your team still answers the 800 it hands over. I take each AI bill off that $2,640, which leaves $2,261 a month for My AskAI, $1,641 for eesel AI and $1,233.50 for Intercom Fin.

The other four bills are worked through in each vendor's section:

Gorgias AI Agent - $1,099 in AI charges

Fini - $1,068 in per-resolution charges, plus its plan

Front - $1,530 with its two add-ons at 5 seats

Zendesk - $2,350 before Zendesk QA

Every published AI bill comes in under the $2,640 of team time the AI's resolutions save. Zendesk's figure leaves out Zendesk QA, whose price isn't listed, and Fini's leaves out the plan fee its pricing page doesn't show. Intercom charges for quality per customer conversation and Front per seat. My AskAI and Gorgias include their ratings in the AI price, and eesel AI's plan includes Reports, though running a report uses credits.

On Fin, Zendesk, Gorgias, Front and Fini, the bill also grows as the AI gets better. We charge per ticket the AI works on, resolved or not. Our AI support agent ROI calculator lets you run the same sums on your own volume.

So which AI customer service agent is best for AI CSAT and quality tracking?

⚡

TL;DR: Intercom Fin is the pick for Intercom teams that want Fin and people rated on one scale and will pay for Pro. My AskAI is the runner-up for a rated reason on every AI conversation in the helpdesk you already run at $379 a month, and Front suits a team already on Front.

Intercom Fin tops the scoreboard on 55 because the Pro add-on does all five jobs, from CX Score's reasons to scorecards your team writes. If you run Intercom and want Fin and your teammates rated on the same terms, it's the most complete option here, at $1,406.50 a month at 2,000 tickets.

My AskAI is second on 52, for a team that wants a rated reason on every AI conversation inside Zendesk, Intercom, Freshdesk, Freshchat, Gorgias or HubSpot, reviewed lowest-first, at $379 a month. Front on 43 suits a team already on Front that wants AI and human quality on one scorecard and works in English. Between close scores, I pick the tool that is better at fixing what scored low, because a low score only improves the next answer when someone acts on it.

Staying put can also make sense. A Zendesk team that owns Zendesk QA already has quality checks running on the AI's conversations, and a Gorgias team with an AI Agent subscription already has Auto QA scoring closed tickets on three fixed criteria.

Whichever tool you pick, start small. Run the AI as internal notes first and compare its drafts with your team's replies, as Edel Optics did before switching to direct replies. Once it's live, read the week's lowest-rated AI conversations by topic and fix the help article or instruction behind each one. With AI sorting and summarizing those conversations for you, that review takes minutes a week, and our 30-day pilot plan walks through the first month.

The 30-day free trial lets you see AI CSAT in Insights on your own tickets, with every feature unlocked and no card.

FAQs

Is 80% CSAT good?

For an AI agent, 80% is a solid result, and where you land depends on the kind of questions you get. Across our published customers, AI CSAT ranges from 75% at RecruitCRM and 78% at YouGarden to 86% over 30 days at TravelJoy and 92% at Edel Optics. A digital-goods marketplace holds 92% and an iGaming operator 72%.

How is CSAT calculated?

CSAT is usually the share of survey answers that are positive, typically a 4 or 5 on a five-point scale, divided by all answers. For AI conversations, also decide which conversations count.

What is quality assurance in customer service?

Customer service quality assurance is the process of checking support conversations against a defined standard and using the results to coach and improve. When an AI answers, check whether each answer was right and on policy, then fix any failure in the help content or instructions behind it.

Can AI predict CSAT on conversations where the customer never answered the survey?

Yes, and four tools here do it. We rate every AI conversation with a reason in My AskAI, Intercom's CX Score rates closed Messenger and email conversations, Front's Smart CSAT fills in where no customer rating exists, and eesel AI rates its agent's answers as an internal signal. With surveys missing most interactions, a predicted rating with its reason shows you the bad conversations among the ones nobody surveyed.

How do you QA an AI agent's answers without reading every ticket?

Let the tool rate or check every conversation, then read only the ones that scored low. Intercom's Monitors and Scorecards, Zendesk QA and Front's Smart QA check the AI's answers against criteria. In My AskAI, we sort the lowest AI CSAT answers by topic and your team asks Echo why each one was given, which beats a manual sample that typically covers 2% to 5% of tickets.

How do you compare AI quality against your human team fairly?

Rate both on the same scale, against the same criteria, split by topic, and decide in advance whose conversation a handed-over ticket is. Intercom's CX Score, Zendesk QA and Front's Smart QA put the AI and your team on shared terms. With My AskAI, internal notes mode puts the AI's draft beside your agent's reply on the same ticket during rollout.

Does AI customer support lower CSAT compared to human agents?

Not as a rule. Our published AI CSAT ranges from 72% to 92% depending on the business, and a Gorgias customer reports its AI above its human team. CSAT drops in three places: when the AI's number includes conversations a person finished, when a handful of survey answers stand in for everyone, and when handover is made hard to push resolution up.

7 Best AI Customer Service Agents for AI CSAT and Quality Tracking (2026)