Refresh and correct Knowledge

Choose the right kind of update#

There is no customer-configurable automatic re-crawl schedule. Plan a source review when policies, products or important public information change.

Request a fresh website crawl#

1. Publish the updated website page and clear its public page cache if needed.
2. Open Websites and choose the domain.
3. Open Knowledge and select Crawl again.
4. Watch the crawl state and processed-page count.
5. When it completes, open the website source to inspect its current documents.

The portal disables the control while a crawl is queued or running. If a duplicate request reaches the server, it reports that a crawl is already running rather than queueing another copy. Repeated clicks do not make the worker faster.

Understand the new snapshot#

When collected content changes, a successful crawl creates a new source version and replaces that source's previous active documents and extracted facts. It does not merge every old page into the new snapshot indefinitely.

If the updated crawl succeeds but reaches fewer pages, inspect what disappeared. An inaccessible page or changed navigation can reduce coverage. If the crawl fails completely, the source shows a failure and previous usable documents may still remain. Do not infer freshness from their continued availability.

Save or pause a manual correction#

Open the Business facts or Answering guidance entry, edit Title or Content, and choose Save Knowledge. Clear Use this entry in answers to stop using an obsolete entry. The source stays in the library as paused.

If the editor reports that the entry changed since you opened it, preserve your draft, close and reopen the source, and merge the changes deliberately. That revision check prevents one teammate from silently overwriting another. The library's refresh icon only reloads the list and cannot resolve the conflicting content for you.

Verify the next answer#

Source changes apply to subsequent answers. They do not rewrite an earlier transcript, remove a message already emailed to your team or guarantee that an unrelated source will not still contain a conflicting fact.

Repeat the affected question in a fresh private test and inspect the retrieved source text if the result is still wrong. For a question about the current product page, also test the installed widget on that exact page. If a business fact is missing from the new crawl, add a verified manual entry in the correct scope while you resolve the website coverage.

Worked example: new store hours in a manual entry#

A business changes the opening hours maintained in a manual fact rather than on a collected page. Its owner opens that specific source, edits the approved schedule and saves it. Running Crawl again would not update the manual field, and clicking the library refresh would only reload its visible state.

The owner checks an ordinary day and a relevant exception against the new entry. If the same hours also appear on the public website, that publication and collection are separate updates. This prevents the assistant receiving a new manual schedule alongside an old public schedule without a deliberate decision about which information is current.

Verify the update path, not just a refresh notice#

Record which authoritative location changed and which operation applied it: public publication and collection, manual source save or guidance edit. Check the active content after that operation. If a run fails, record the failure and the actual old content still available rather than reporting the new policy as imported.

Keep the acceptance questions associated with the approved business revision. A test that changes its expected amount to match an unexpected reply hides the mismatch. The worked examples below show how to investigate conflicting values, compare essential coverage and hand over the next review trigger without assuming an automatic crawl schedule exists.

Worked example: a public cache still serves the old fee#

The business approves a delivery fee change and the editor shows the new amount. A visitor session still receives the old public page because the website's publication or cache layer has not been updated. The maintainer checks the customer-facing URL before requesting collection; an administrator preview is not evidence of what the crawler can fetch.

After the site maintainer makes the correct public version available, the Knowledge maintainer performs the relevant collection and inspects the stored fee. If the stored document still differs from the visitor-visible public text, they keep that specific comparison for investigation. If it matches but the reply uses another amount, they inspect manual entries and shared policies for an active conflicting version. These are different failure points, so they should not keep clearing caches after the source itself is already correct.

The acceptance record compares four values: the approved business fee, the public page, the active source text and the new answer. It also includes a threshold or excluded item that changes the rule. Only when those facts agree for the intended customer case is the update accepted. This catches a saved-but-unpublished edit, a stale collected version and a contradictory manual fact without treating them as the same refresh problem.

Worked example: a redesign collects delivery but loses returns#

Before a redesign, the business identifies three essential topics: delivery charges, return exclusions and customer contact. After the collection, delivery is present with the new fee, contact remains complete, but the returns page is absent. The job's usable delivery content does not establish that the whole intended support coverage survived.

The maintainer compares the missing returns URL with the redesigned public navigation. A moved page, different hostname, login boundary or link accessible only through a search interaction can explain the gap. They investigate the actual difference rather than recreating every website source. The source reader's document pagination matters here: an absent item from the first visible group is not proof that the page is missing from all active documents.

The release check becomes two independent outcomes: the fee correction passed, while returns coverage needs remediation. The business supplies a focused approved source for the missing rule where appropriate and tracks the website coverage issue separately. A wholly failed run requires another distinction: earlier usable content may remain, but it must be labelled as the previous available version, not accepted as the redesigned policy. This topic-level comparison makes a partial release visible without requiring a claim that every page on a large site was imported.

Prepare a policy with a future effective date#

A business plans to change a rule next month. Adding the future amount as an unqualified current fact can make the assistant state it too early. Keep the approved effective date and conditions explicit in the public or manual policy, and review which version is intended for customers asking about today versus the future period. The business must decide that rule; a source refresh does not establish commercial policy.

There is no timed source-activation or automatic re-crawl scheduler in the current customer interface. Arrange the actual publication, manual source edit and verification at the appropriate time through the responsible business workflow. Do not describe a paused entry as scheduled to enable itself. If both versions must be available for explanation, distinguish their applicability clearly and test date-specific questions before relying on them.

For example, test a request under the current rule, a request after the effective date and a question whose date is unknown. The last case may need a useful clarification instead of choosing whichever amount is most recent in the text. At the release date, check for obsolete manual and collected copies, then verify the intended cases again. This is a policy-transition review, not just another generic request to refresh. Keep any conflict between the two versions explicit until the business owner resolves it.