# Travel Expert \| Reviewer - Company: [Vetto]() - Location: Remote - Remote: Yes - Team: Finance - Salary: $45 / hour - Posted: February 5, 2026 ## Job description We’re recruiting **Travel professionals and experienced trip planners** to review and improve **realistic travel scenarios** used to train AI travel assistants. Your job isn’t to “write itineraries.” It’s to think like a real trip planner and spot what makes a travel situation **real, feasible, and decision-changing** — then upgrade weak scenarios so they actually test the model. ‼️ **AI is not allowed.** If we spot AI use, we’ll block the application. ⚠️ **This application form must be completed entirely in English.** 🚨 **READ ALL THE DESCRIPTION BELOW TO UNDERSTAND THE APPLICATION FORM.** --- **WHO CAN APPLY** * Travel professionals and experienced trip planners * 3+ years of relevant travel planning experience (professional or high-volume personal) * English level: Advanced / Fluent (required) --- **WHAT YOU’LL DO IN THE APPLICATION (QUICK SCREENING TEST)** You will review **two pre-generated travel tasks**. For each task, you’ll answer simple **1–5 ratings** and give a short justification. Then, for the **2nd task**, you’ll **rewrite it to make it stronger**. --- **WHAT “STRONG” MEANS (SIMPLE DEFINITION)** A strong task includes **one decisive feasibility constraint** that can flip the plan if ignored (missed train, missed check-in, closed attraction, wrong station, etc.). We call this a **Knife**: * A Knife is a constraint that **changes what itinerary is actually viable**. * Quick test: if you remove it, the “best plan” would meaningfully change. Examples of Knives in Travel * Last train / last entry / check-in cutoff times * Closures and holidays that change what’s possible * Ambiguous locations (airport/station names that can be confused) * Sequential dependencies (if A slips, B becomes impossible) * Mobility constraints that change routing feasibility --- **WHAT YOU WILL RATE (1–5) IN THE FORM** You’ll give 3 ratings per task: 1. Overall Quality (1–5) How clear and testable the task is (can you judge PASS/FAIL)? 2. Knife / Hidden Context Strength (1–5) Is there a decisive feasibility constraint — or is the “hidden context” just extra color that doesn’t change the plan? 3. Checklist Quality (1–5) Does the checklist truly test feasibility + the Knife with clear criteria? (Strong checklists include verification steps and forbid inventing logistics, written as PASS/FAIL — not “be helpful.”) You’ll also write a short justification (2–4 bullets) explaining your ratings. --- **WHAT YOU WILL REWRITE (FOR THE 2ND TASK ONLY)** You will rewrite these parts to make the task stronger: * Scenario (3rd person) — more realistic + naturally sets up the feasibility risk * Prompt (user message) — natural, human, does not reveal the Knife * Hidden Context (1–3 bullets) — must include exactly 1 decisive Knife * Checklist (4–6 items) — each item must be PASS/FAIL, covering: + feasibility/verification (minimum unknowns to check) + the Knife (the decision-flipping constraint) + no invented logistics (no made-up schedules/hours/availability) + branching plan (Plan A / Plan B) when feasibility depends on one missing answer + safety only when there is real risk Checklist item example: PASS if it flags what must be verified (tickets/hours/cutoffs) before committing; FAIL if it confidently invents times or availability. Important: Don’t “leak” the Knife in the prompt (no “IMPORTANT”, no all-caps, no “the key detail is…”). --- **IF SELECTED (PROJECT WORK)** You’ll review batches of pre-generated travel scenarios: * Rating realism and feasibility risk * Identifying weak or missing constraints (Knives) * Improving tasks so they better represent real travel moments where wrong advice causes missed connections, wasted money, or ruined plans --- **COMPENSATION** Payment will be US$ 30 per approved task, converted and paid in your local currency. Each task takes approximately 40 minutes, which corresponds to an effective rate of about US$ 45 per hour. --- **WHAT WE’RE LOOKING FOR** * You can recognize what’s realistic vs. generic in travel planning * You understand what truly flips feasibility (cutoffs, closures, dependencies, ambiguous locations) * You can upgrade a “fine” scenario into a strong feasibility test without making it artificial ## Apply [Apply on Vetto]() Canonical job page: