A short, identical invitation goes to everyone a few days after their visit: tell us how it went, and if you would like to say it publicly, here is where. Responses land in one table with the visit type and provider attached, so a pattern in the comments is visible rather than anecdotal.
Start from the Feedback Survey. It is a live Taskade Genesis app that gathers responses and organises them for reuse, which is where a review request has to begin even though it does not yet handle the timing. Submit something, then clone it into your own workspace in about ten seconds and set your own send window, wording, and follow-through.
The build gives you the invitation, a timing rule relative to the visit, a short response form, links to wherever you would like public reviews to go, a record of who was invited and who responded, and an AI agent that groups the free-text comments into recurring themes such as waiting time, parking, or how well something was explained. Every person receives the same invitation with the same options, which keeps the collection honest and the data worth reading.
Responses are legible in more than one shape:
- Table view as the full response log with provider, visit type, and theme
- Board view to move themes through noticed, discussed, and actioned
- List view for reading the comments themselves in sequence
- Plus the rest of the 7 project views
Automations handle the timing. On paid plans, Taskade automations send the invitation on your interval, skip anyone who has already responded recently, and alert an owner when a response mentions something your practice wants to hear about immediately. Across 100+ bidirectional integrations, your calendar pulls completed visits in while Gmail pushes invitations out.
The AI agents carry 34 built-in tools including persistent memory and web search. The theme grouping improves over time because the agent remembers the categories your practice actually uses rather than inventing new ones each month.
Workspace DNA is what turns comments into a decision. Memory holds every response, the visit it relates to, and the themes you have already named. Intelligence, drawing on 15+ frontier models from OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and open-weight providers, groups free text into those themes and shows what changed since last month. Execution invites on schedule, logs the response, and alerts an owner when a theme you care about appears.
Running it in your practice
- Write one invitation and use it for everyone. Same wording, same options, every time. That is what makes the data worth reading.
- Clone the app and set the interval. Two to five days after the visit is the range most practices settle on.
- Offer both routes plainly. A private response and a public review link, side by side, with no steering between them.
- Name your themes up front. Waiting, communication, booking, facilities, cost. The agent will add to the list, but starting from your language keeps it usable.
- Move one theme per month. Pick the theme with the most mentions, fix something concrete, and record it on the board so the loop is visible to the team.
The value is not the star rating. It is knowing which of five things to fix first, with evidence rather than the loudest recent complaint.
Clone it, invite the team, and the wording is yours. The interval, the questions, and where public reviews point are all yours to set.
Explore more: build a form with logic if you want branching questions, the Community Gallery for feedback apps others publish, or create to start from your own description. This pairs with the post visit follow up, which is the operational counterpart, and with the intake volume dashboard when you want feedback next to the numbers.
Frequently Asked Questions
When is the right moment to ask?
Most practices land on two to five days after the visit: recent enough to remember, far enough that the day itself has settled. You set the interval and can vary it by visit type.
Does everyone get the same invitation?
Yes, and that matters. One invitation, the same options for everyone, including both a private response and a public review link. That keeps what you collect representative rather than filtered.
What do we do with critical feedback?
It routes to an owner with the visit context attached, and you can alert immediately on the themes your practice cares most about. Having it in a queue with an owner is the difference between hearing it and acting on it.
Can we see patterns rather than one-off comments?
Yes. The agent groups comments into recurring themes and the board view lets you move a theme through noticed, discussed, and actioned so the loop closes visibly.
Does it post reviews on our behalf?
No. It invites, and it links to wherever you ask people to leave a public review. What somebody writes and where they write it is entirely theirs.
Can we exclude some appointment types?
Yes. Describe which types to skip and the sequence honours it. Practices commonly exclude very short administrative visits.
Does the app ask about anything clinical?
Only what you write, and most practices keep it to experience: waiting, communication, and whether anything was unclear. The app adds no questions of its own about care.
