UCCE - PQ consider if with CallType

[anthonyroesler]

Looking to send a call that comes into a PQ with a specific calltype on to the next step.

Can it be done like this with a custom function, CustomFunction(Call.CallType != IC_SC_NewOutage)?

So the call comes in with with a CallType of IC_SC_NewOutage, this function would return a False then and move on to the next step.

[anthonyroesler]

I will update the current status of my testing.

This is the code I am actually trying to put this into:

CCE 11.5

(((PQStep.ITSC.1.RouterAgentsLoggedIn > 2)&&(PQ.ITSC.CallsInQ < 2))||(CustomFunction(Call.CallTypeID != 11251)))

[geoff]

You can test many of these with Call Tracer. For all my deployments I always define a simple dialed number (either AAA_CallTracer or ZZZ_CallTracer on the first Routing Client - so it's easy to find) and a Call Tracer call type and a Call Tracer script to fiddle with. You can exercise the Router brain and get a text file output. It answers a million questions.

Regards,

Geoff

[anthonyroesler]

Hey Geoff,

I'm not familiar with Call Tracer. Is there documentation I could look into on it?

[bill.king1]

It is outlined with examples in the Scripting Guide, like here.

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/cust_contact/contact_center/icm_enterprise/icm_enterprise_11_6_1/User/Guide/ucce_b_scripting-and-media-routing-guide1/ucce_b_scripting-and-media-routing-guide1_chapter_0100.html

[geoff]

Call Tracer is your friend.

I always set up a Call Tracer script, Call Type and Dialed Number at all my customers. It's not a real number so make it easy to find in Call Tracer. Put it on the first Routing Client you see in the Call Tracer drop down and name the DN something like zz_CallTracer. Now it's easy to find when you fire up Call Tracer - just go to the bottom of all the DNs on the first RC.

Attach this to a Call Type like zz_CallTracer and scheduled against a script called zz_CallTracer. I also create a couple of dummy User Variables like userZZCallTracer_Long and userZZCallTracer_Char. I use zz to push the object to the bottom of any list - easy to find, but not interfering.

Now you can use these global variables in a creative way to look inside the memory of the Router. If you are testing complex custom functions or evaluations just set the appropriate dummy global to a value (with a SET node) then set it again and again. When you push a dummy call through with Call Tracer the output will show exactly what you are trying to evaluate and the result will be in braces { } at the end of the line.

It's harder to describe what to do than to actually do it.

I rarely use Call Tracer to simulate a call through a Routing script - CVP, Send To VRU and NVRU scripts take away a lot of the effectiveness of Call Tracer for its original role. But it's really a huge help with custom functions and complex CONDITION IFs. 

As I said - Call Tracer let's you look inside the Router memory.

Regards,

Geoff

[anthonyroesler]

Thanks guys, definitely has helped. I am running into an issue still now where the PQ is just staying at step 1 and not hitting step 2 right away, even though we are sending it in with a CallTypeID that should cause it to go right to step 2.

My question is, if there are agents available in step 1, will it automatically just send the call to them in step 1? Just trying to test getting a call sent straight through to step 2.

The situation is the caller can hit 2 at any point and that sets a specific calltype which then is supposed to escalate the call and put them direct to an agent.

Consider If code is below.

((Call.CallTypeID!=11251)||(PQ.ITSC.CallsInQ<=2)||(PQ.ITSC.LoggedOn>2))

[bill.king1 · Accepted solution]

The steps are evaluated one at a top, from step 1 onward, so yes, if you have criteria that meets what you have for step 1, they'll get the call.

From what it sounds like, you'd want it reversed, if your special scenario is met with the special call type, send it to the special agents that have a certain attribute in step 1, otherwise use only your normal agents for step 2.

[anthonyroesler]

:) That's exactly what we did. Thanks for the reply!