Role
Designer & developer
Use case
Client-facing inquiry response
Stack
HTML / CSS / Java, AI API integration
Domain
DOT drug-testing compliance

The problem

Businesses that employ commercial drivers ask the same compliance questions again and again: when a test is required, what happens after a positive result, who needs to be in the testing program. Each inquiry was answered by hand, which meant delays for the client and inconsistent wording from one response to the next.

The goal was to shorten response times and standardize answers on a topic where precision matters — without pretending a chatbot can replace a compliance professional.

The solution

I built a custom AI agent that greets clients on the web, answers common DOT drug-testing questions in plain language, and escalates anything ambiguous or case-specific to a person. It combines a lightweight HTML/CSS front end, Java-based logic, and an AI model connected through an API.

Compliance AssistantIllustrative conversation
We just hired a CDL driver. Can he start driving right away?
Generally, a driver in a DOT-regulated safety-sensitive position needs a verified negative pre-employment drug test result before performing those duties. If you tell me the driver's role and whether they've tested recently, I can point you to the right next step.Requirements can vary by situation — a specialist will confirm.
He was tested at his last job two months ago. Does that count?
That depends on specific conditions, and I don't want to give you a guess on a compliance question. I'm sending this to a compliance specialist who can review the details and reply to you directly.Escalated to a human
Conversation is illustrative and does not reflect any real client exchange.

How it works

Grounded in published guidance

Answers are drawn from a curated knowledge base built on published DOT and FMCSA drug-testing requirements, rather than the model's general memory.

Plain-language responses

The agent explains requirements in everyday terms and asks a clarifying question when a request is too broad to answer safely.

Built-in guardrails

The agent doesn't give legal determinations, doesn't ask for sensitive personal details, and hands off to a human whenever a question turns on specific facts.

Review loop

Conversations that escalate are reviewed so the knowledge base and prompts improve over time.

Outcomes

  • Faster first response. Routine inquiries receive an immediate answer instead of waiting on a staff member.
  • More consistent service. Every client hears the same, approved explanation of the same rule.
  • Staff time back. Team members focus on the complex cases that need judgment.
  • A real client-facing deployment, not a classroom prototype — which shaped every decision about accuracy, tone, and escalation.

What I learned

In a regulated domain, the most important feature of an AI assistant is knowing what it shouldn't answer. Most of the design effort went into defining the boundary — what the agent handles confidently, what it flags, and what it routes to a person — and that boundary is what made the tool trustworthy enough to put in front of clients.