← HumanSurvey

Use case · Event organizers

Event feedback, the AI-native way.

You just ran a conference, a meetup, or a webinar. Now comes the part everyone dreads: getting structured feedback from attendees while it's still fresh, writing a retro your speakers and sponsors can actually read, and deciding what to change for next time. This page is about making your AI agent run that whole loop — session ratings, open text, speaker-specific feedback, and a grounded synthesis — before the attendees log off for the day.

The old way

Rebuild a post-event Typeform, one row per session in a matrix question. Export the attendee list from Eventbrite or Luma. Send them the link with a generic “we'd love your feedback” subject line. 22% respond. Export the CSV. Open Sheets. Sort by session. Paste open-text responses into a doc and try to summarize. Tell the keynote speaker “people loved it” and the workshop host “there were some comments” based on vibes. Send a retro Slack message three days later that half the org skims.

None of that is broken — it's just slow, and it leaves a mountain of nuance on the cutting-room floor. The synthesis step is the one that actually matters for deciding what to change next time, and it's the step a human is least good at when tired on a Sunday evening.

The new loop

HumanSurvey is a small hosted-form service fronted by an MCP server and a REST API. Your agent — Claude Code, Claude Desktop, Cursor, any MCP client — takes on three jobs:

  1. 01Designs the schema from your intent: per-session matrix ratings, an overall NPS, open text, and whatever speaker-specific or sponsor-specific questions you want.
  2. 02Creates the survey and returns /s/{id}. You drop the link in the event Slack, Discord, or the day-of attendee email. Or ask your agent to post to the channel if it has that tool.
  3. 03Reads the results and synthesizes — by session, by track, by speaker, by sponsor — into whatever format you need (retro doc, per-speaker email drafts, sponsor-facing PDF).

The whole point is that an organizer (often a volunteer or a very tired full-timer) doesn't spend Sunday night pivoting a spreadsheet. The agent does the reading. You review the output.

Worked example — post-conference retro

You organized a two-day developer conference. Four tracks, 22 sessions, 380 attendees. Monday morning, you open Claude Code with HumanSurvey installed and say:

“Run our post-conference feedback survey. Matrix: for each of these 22 sessions, 1–5 rating and would-recommend yes/no. Overall NPS for the whole conference. Open text: what should we change next year? Multi-choice: which tracks do you want more of? Keep it 4 minutes max, expires Friday.”

You paste in the session list from the event page. Claude generates the schema — the matrix question is the one organizers always write badly by hand, and the agent gets the row/column shape right on the first try:

{
  "title": "DevConf 2026 — your feedback",
  "description": "4 minutes. Helps us plan DevConf 2027.",
  "sections": [{
    "questions": [
      { "type": "matrix",
        "label": "Rate each session you attended (1–5; skip if you didn't go)",
        "rows": [
          "Keynote — What's next for open-source databases",
          "Track A: Building an agent-native backend",
          "Track A: Workshop — MCP server basics",
          "Track B: From prototype to 10M requests/day",
          "Track C: Fireside — the future of serverless"
          /* … 17 more rows … */
        ],
        "columns": ["1", "2", "3", "4", "5", "N/A"]
      },
      { "type": "scale",
        "label": "How likely are you to recommend DevConf to a colleague?",
        "min": 0, "max": 10,
        "minLabel": "Not at all", "maxLabel": "Definitely" },
      { "type": "multi_choice",
        "label": "Which tracks do you want more of next year?",
        "options": [
          { "label": "Databases & storage" },
          { "label": "Agent infrastructure" },
          { "label": "Scaling & performance" },
          { "label": "Developer experience" },
          { "label": "Security" }
        ]
      },
      { "type": "text", "label": "One thing we should change next year?" }
    ]
  }],
  "max_responses": 500,
  "expires_at": "2026-04-24T23:59:00Z"
}

Claude calls create_survey and returns https://www.humansurvey.co/s/evt445. You drop it into the post-event attendee email and pin it in the #general Slack channel. By Thursday, 241 responses are in. You ask Claude:

“Summarize DevConf feedback, grouped by track. Include what to change.”

Claude calls get_results and returns:

241 responses (63%). NPS: 56 (strong).

Top-rated sessions:
  1. Keynote — Open-source databases  (4.7 / 5, 92% recommend)
  2. Track B workshop — 10M req/day   (4.6 / 5, 88% recommend)
  3. Fireside — future of serverless  (4.5 / 5, 85% recommend)

Bottom-rated sessions:
  1. Track A: MCP server basics       (3.1 / 5, 41% recommend)
     → open text theme: "too basic, expected deeper content"
  2. Track C: Security panel          (3.3 / 5, 48% recommend)
     → open text theme: "panelists talked past each other"

Track demand for next year:
  1. Agent infrastructure (71%)  ← clear #1, up from 52% last year
  2. Scaling & performance (54%)
  3. Developer experience (48%)
  4. Databases & storage (33%)
  5. Security (22%)

Top "what to change" themes (from 188 open-text responses):
  1. Longer breaks between sessions (47 mentions)
  2. Food queue was too slow on Day 2 (31 mentions)
  3. Track A needs advanced content, not intro talks (24 mentions)
  4. More ad-hoc unconference space (18 mentions)

Suggested moves for DevConf 2027:
  1. Double the agent-infra track — demand has shifted there.
  2. Rework Track A content design — split beginner vs advanced.
  3. Extend between-session breaks to 20 min (currently 10).
  4. Fix food logistics on Day 2 — separate queue or staggered lunch.
  5. Send per-speaker feedback packets (Claude can draft these).

Then you ask Claude to draft per-speaker emails with the relevant slice of the data, which it does grounded in the raw JSON — each speaker gets their own rating, their own open-text comments, and nothing about the other 21 sessions.

Other event scenarios that fit the same loop

  • Pre-event expectation survey. Two weeks before the event, ask registered attendees what they're hoping to get out of it. Your agent cross-checks against the agenda and flags mismatches so you can adjust session framing or prep speakers.
  • Mid-event daily pulse. For multi-day conferences, send a short end-of-Day-1 survey. If something's going wrong (food, AV, pacing), you find out in time to fix Day 2 — not in the retro three weeks later.
  • Sponsor feedback. Post-event, ask sponsors about booth traffic quality, lead capture, and whether they'd sponsor again. Your agent drafts a sponsor-facing retro PDF grounded in their own responses plus overall attendee metrics.
  • Speaker self-reflection. A private survey sent to speakers only — what worked, what they'd change about their slot, venue/AV issues. Keeps institutional knowledge in a machine-readable form for next year's program committee.
  • Meetup / community retro. Smaller, faster cadence. 3 questions, closes in 48 hours, your agent reads the results and updates the next month's meetup agenda proposal automatically.
  • Webinar / online workshop feedback. Triggered at the end of the Zoom/Meet session. Quick NPS, one ranking question on which follow-up topic people want, one open text. Your agent compiles the list and feeds it into your next-session planning.

How this compares

Event feedback tools fall into three rough shapes — platforms with bundled surveying, general form builders, and agent-native infrastructure. Pick based on who is going to consume the output:

ToolBuildRead
Sched / WhovaHuman, in the event platformHuman, platform dashboard
TypeformHuman, visual builderHuman, dashboard
Eventbrite surveyHuman, bundled toolHuman, CSV export
Google FormsHuman, visual builderHuman, Sheets
HumanSurveyAgent, from plain languageAgent, structured JSON

If your event is already running on Sched or Whova and you have time to read the responses by eye, use the bundled survey. If you're a volunteer meetup organizer who just wants structured feedback without extra tooling, HumanSurvey is probably the lowest overhead — especially if Claude is already the tool you use to draft the post-event email.

Getting started in two steps

  1. 01Add HumanSurvey as an MCP server in Claude Code (~/.claude.json). Full config snippet in the docs.
  2. 02Ask Claude: "create an API key for HumanSurvey." It calls create_key. Next time an event wraps, describe the retro you want — Claude does the rest.

More