EKA ExamplesReal runs · recordings and screenshots

Why was the warranty claim rejected?

COMPLETEEvidence and authority

Structured evidence and document retrieval, kept apart.

The question

“Why was WCL-2026-000002 rejected, and what does the warranty policy say?”

A replay of the captured run through the EKA Workspace. No model is called in replay.

What it looks like

Recorded walkthrough

35 seconds, without sound, in replay. The transcript below describes it.
Transcript
  1. The question is typed and sent: Why was WCL-2026-000002 rejected, and what does the warranty policy say?
  2. The activity rail runs, then the answer arrives with its result: COMPLETE.
  3. The answer reads: Warranty claim WCL-2026-000002 was rejected because Support recorded the decision reason as impact damage, which the extended policy excludes. The warranty policy WP-EXT-36 states that eligible manufacturing defects may be considered during the 36-month policy period, but impact damage is explicitly excluded from coverage.
  4. The steps are opened: Reading the warranty decision · Searching documents · Writing the answer.
  5. The evidence is opened: 7 items.
  6. The view returns to the answer.

Screenshots

Four moments of the run, one tab each.

The question, as entered — EKA Workspace replaying the captured run for “Why was WCL-2026-000002 rejected, and what does the warranty policy say?”
The question, as entered
The activity rail, mid-run — EKA Workspace replaying the captured run for “Why was WCL-2026-000002 rejected, and what does the warranty policy say?”
The activity rail, mid-run
The answer and its result — EKA Workspace replaying the captured run for “Why was WCL-2026-000002 rejected, and what does the warranty policy say?”
The answer and its result
The evidence, expanded — EKA Workspace replaying the captured run for “Why was WCL-2026-000002 rejected, and what does the warranty policy say?”
The evidence, expanded

Where it is explained

EKA Guide 07 — Why was the warranty claim rejected?