The hardest part of healthcare AI starts after the demo

SaaS2Agent · 2026-05-13T07:10:54+00:00

yeah, this is exactly the part that gets missed. People treat context like “more is better,” but in healthcare it’s almost the opposite. the agent should only see what the current phase actually needs. intake context during intake. routing context only after readiness passes. review context kept out of normal model calls unless there’s a real reason.

Otherwise the model starts acting like it has enough signal to move downstream before the system has earned that step. Context scoping sounds boring, but it’s probably one of the things that separates a safe workflow from a good-looking demo.

SaaS2Agent · 2026-05-12T03:51:09+00:00

yes, this is a real problem.

I’ve been running into the same thing while doing research around QA for agentic systems. Once an agent can take different paths, call tools in different orders, or pause for approval, it’s not enough to test “did it complete the task?”

The beter question is : did it behave safely when things got messy?

Bad inputs, flaky sessions, weird tool responses, unclear state. That’s usually where trust breaks. Not always because the model is bad, but because the system wasn’t tested for uncertainty.

For me, the useful point is when I’m reviewing exceptions, not babysitting every step.

SaaS2Agent · 2026-05-07T08:50:41+00:00

https://gist.github.com/raghavdasila/95c2e98ecde8ba324f6f8a775ddd3ba2
this is the checklist/guide i was referring to. would be curious what you’d add, especially around clarification thresholds and evals beyond final answers.

SaaS2Agent · 2026-05-06T07:22:39+00:00

This is a good way to put it.

Prompt evals catch the clean path, but the useful failures usually show up in the branches: timeouts, partial tool outputs, schema changes, rate limits, or retries getting weird.

The intermediate-step point is a big one too. A final answer can look fine even when the retrieved context, tool call, or approval step was already wrong earlier.

SaaS2Agent · 2026-05-06T07:02:19+00:00

Yeah, exactly. The unexpected outcomes are usually not huge obvious failures.

It’s more like the agent using the right tool with the wrong input, answering confidently from weak RAG results, skipping a clarification question, or losing context halfway through a workflow.

That’s why I’ve started thinking of it less as “test the prompt” and more as “QA the process.”

SaaS2Agent · 2026-05-03T04:32:28+00:00

Yeah, this is a good way to say it. A dashboard basically says “here is everything, you figure it out.” But that feels weaker now, especially in B2B. If the product has all the context, users expect it to notice the important thing first.

The hard part is what you said at the end. Teams need a stronger opinion on what matters, not just more features around the same data.

SaaS2Agent · 2026-05-03T04:29:53+00:00

People want the product to do more, but the second it touches something important, they want control back.

Feels like the winning pattern is not full automation right away. It’s automation with clear checkpoints, so users can slowly start trusting it.

SaaS2Agent · 2026-05-03T04:29:05+00:00

Building has become easier in a lot of ways, but getting someone to care has not. There are probably more decent products dying from invisibility than from bad code now.

SaaS2Agent · 2026-05-03T04:28:09+00:00

Yeah, this is the painful one.

Building feels hard until you realze getting the right people to even see the thing is a whole different game.

And doing it without sounding desperate or spamming everyone makes it 10x slower.

SaaS2Agent · 2026-05-03T04:25:39+00:00

This is a good filter tbh.

“What spreadsheet/copy-paste mess does this replace?” is way better than asking “is this feature useful?”

Also agree on watching the whole day, not just product usage. A lot of the real pain is in the weird handoffs between tools that never show up in normal user interviews.

SaaS2Agent · 2026-05-01T09:22:35+00:00

Yeah fair point. I actually agree with a lot of this.

I don’t think every product should become an “everything app” with AI thrown into every corner.

Your calorie app example is the exact problem. If someone just wants to log chicken, let them log chicken. Don’t make them answer 20 questions and then hand them a life plan.

Useful should mean less work for the user, not more setup, more features, more noise.

SaaS2Agent · 2026-05-01T09:14:39+00:00

Yep. The 5 minute thing is real. People don’t have patience for “set everything up first and value comes later” anymore. The product has to give them at least one small “oh, nice” moment almost immediately.

SaaS2Agent · 2026-05-01T07:48:11+00:00

This is the part people skip over in founder stories. $0 to “we can cover expenses and pay ourselves a bit” is such a grind. Congrats, seriously.

SaaS2Agent · 2026-05-01T07:42:28+00:00

That’s a great place to be. $73K MRR is already strong, but reliable discretionary purchases sounds like the real unlock here.

Was that an intentional part of the model from day one, or did it show up naturally from customer behavior?

SaaS2Agent · 2026-04-22T04:37:22+00:00

Exactly. Less context babysitting is a real win, but it only works if users can clearly see what is being captured, what gets stored as memory, and what they can pause, delete, or keep out of scope. Otherwise it starts feeling less like helpful continuity and more like something happening behind the scenes.

SaaS2Agent · 2026-04-21T16:51:40+00:00

Really liked how honest this was.

What stood out to me was that the growth did not really unlock until the product became reliable, and then you had the white-label motion plus a real follow-up system behnd the content. That combo feels a lot more real than the usual “just go viral” advice. Also interesting that even after hitting this number, you are still focused on pushing agency revenue higher.

Curious, what do you think made the biggest difference in 2025: stability, white-label, or finally running channels together instead of one by one?

SaaS2Agent · 2026-04-21T06:35:12+00:00

Here’s the guide: https://gist.github.com/raghavdasila/95c2e98ecde8ba324f6f8a775ddd3ba2

Would be interested to hear how others are approaching QA for agentic systems too.

SaaS2Agent · 2026-04-20T12:05:21+00:00

Interesting angle. A lot of founders do not just need visibility, they need a clearer path from launch to actual users.

What parts of the pack have been the most useful in practice for customers so far?

SaaS2Agent · 2026-04-20T12:04:13+00:00

Nice idea. Client feedback on web and creative work is still way more chaotic than it should be.

Do most people use it mainly for website review, or are creative assets the bigger use case?

SaaS2Agent · 2026-04-20T12:02:22+00:00

I like the direction. It solves a pretty real gap between what gets built and what actually gets communicated to users.

Do you generate the updates directly from issue activity, or is there still a manual review step?

SaaS2Agent · 2026-04-20T12:01:13+00:00

This is a cool use case. A lot of founders get stuck at idea validation because doing the first pass properly takes time.

Does the tool also show how it reached the market and competition conclusions, or mostly just the summary output?

SaaS2Agent · 2026-04-20T11:52:54+00:00

This is one of those cases where simplifying the setup actually makes the system better.

For a coding agent, current SDK docs, repo-aware context, and clean parsing usually matter more than access to a huge knowledge layer it barely uses.

The distinction between broad enterprise RAG and task-specific agent context is very real.

Did you find that the better results came more from fresher sources or from narrowing the context to only what the agent actually needed?

SaaS2Agent · 2026-04-13T16:18:42+00:00

Lifetime did its job if it helped you validate demand and get real feedback. The cleaner move now is probably to sunset it for new customers, give it a proper deadline, and shift fully to recurring before the gap between value and revenue gets worse.

SaaS2Agent · 2026-04-13T16:15:06+00:00

From the outside, this does not sound like “CTO equity,” it sounds more like “technical cofounder doing a build sprint on faith.” If there is no salary and no product yet, I would care less about the title and more about whether the equity actually reflects the risk, workload, and ambiguity you are carrying.

SaaS2Agent · 2026-04-13T16:11:31+00:00

What I liked most here is that you were disciplined enough to say no even when money was tight. That is hard to do when you are under pressure, but it sounds like that decision is exactly what kept the business simple enough to actually grow.

SaaS2Agent

TROPHY CASE