Help articles re-checked when the product changes

For: Knowledge manager or support enablement lead owning the help centre

Pattern: WatchtowerNeeds a connectorDesigned for 10 to 300 agents

The pain today

Every release quietly breaks a few help articles. Nobody knows which, so customers follow wrong steps and agents paste outdated macros until a ticket points it out.

The ask

Watch our release notes and the connected help centre. Each time something ships, find the articles and macros that describe the changed behaviour, quote the sentence that is now wrong, and leave everything else alone.

Plain words, as you would say it to a colleague. Edit it to fit your case before you send it.

What you attach or connect

  • Help centre articles and agent macros
  • Release notes or changelog feed
  • Product area map
  • Style guide for suggested rewrites

The unit of work

One worker task per one article or macro against one release change.

Why a swarm fits

Most articles do not depend on most changes. Tracking which article rests on which behaviour means a release re-opens a handful of units, not the whole help centre.

Not for

A help centre small enough to reread after each release: just reread it.

The decision tree

5 typed decisions, each with an action for every answer

At fixed moments in a run, the engine puts one narrow question to a decision model. The decision model never writes text: it answers yes or no with a probability, picks from listed options, or gives a score, about a small slice of the material. The engine then does exactly what this tree says, which is what makes the run auditable. The thresholds are the template's design values, not measured results.

  1. Planner, while planning

    Scope checkA choice among options

    Before work starts on a unit

    Is this release note specific enough to judge help articles against?

    Sees only: One release note entry

    Why: A vague note cannot prove an article wrong, so it becomes a question for product.

    • Names the changed behaviour preciselythenAccept
    • Vague, such as general improvementsthenAsk a person
    • Internal change with no customer effectthenSkip this unit
  2. Scope checkYes or no, with a probability

    Before work starts on a unit

    Does this article or macro describe the screen, setting or step that the release note says has changed?

    Sees only: The release note entry and the article's headings and step list

    Why: Most articles do not depend on most changes, and those are never re-read.

    • Yes: 0.55 or higherthenAccept
    • Unsure: 0.25 up to 0.55thenAccept
    • No: below 0.25thenSkip this unit
  3. After workers, the judge checks

    Evidence checkYes or no, with a probability

    After a worker answers

    Does the quoted article sentence tell the customer to do something that the quoted release note says no longer works that way?

    Sees only: The quoted article sentence and the quoted release note

    Why: A knowledge manager flooded with false flags stops reading them.

    • Yes: 0.85 or higherthenAccept
    • Unsure: 0.50 up to 0.85thenMark unresolved
    • No: below 0.50thenReject and retry
  4. Run control, between rounds

    Another round?Yes or no, with a probability

    Between rounds

    Are there articles linked to the changed behaviour that have not yet been compared with this release note?

    Sees only: The list of dependent articles with their check status for this release

    Why: Ends the release's re-check once every dependant has been looked at, and no sooner.

    • Yes: 0.50 or higherthenContinue
    • Unsure: 0.20 up to 0.50thenContinue
    • No: below 0.20thenStop
  5. Accountable person, before anything is settled

    Person decidesYes or no, with a probability

    Before anything is reported as settled

    Could the release note and the article both be read two ways, so that product must confirm what shipped before a correction is drafted?

    Sees only: One verified flag with both quotes

    Why: Nothing is published automatically, and only product knows what actually shipped.

    Accountable: The knowledge manager approves every published change; product confirms what actually shipped.

    • Yes: 0.35 or higherthenAsk a person
    • Unsure: 0.10 up to 0.35thenAsk a person
    • No: below 0.10thenAccept

The fleet: who does what

Model tiers by role, not brands: you choose the models. Strong reasoning models plan and reconcile, small fast models do the wide work, and the judge is a decision model from a different family, so it does not share the workers' blind spots.

  1. Planner

    A strong reasoning model maps each article to the behaviours it describes and routes each change to its dependants.

    Decisions here:1. Scope check2. Scope check

  2. Workers

    Small fast workers from an open-weight family each compare one article with one change and quote what no longer holds.

    Designed for 10 to 300 agents, one worker task per one article or macro against one release change. Each worker receives only its own unit.

  3. Judge, from a different model family

    A decision model from a different family checks the quoted sentence truly conflicts with the quoted release note.

    Decisions here:3. Evidence check

  4. Reconciler

    A strong reasoning model batches fixes per article and turns unclear release notes into questions for product.

    Decisions here:4. Another round?

  5. Accountable person

    The knowledge manager approves every published change; product confirms what actually shipped.

    Decisions here:5. Person decides

Checked before anything is accepted

  • Each flag quotes the article sentence and the release note
  • Suggested rewrites are drafts and are never published automatically
  • Articles judged unaffected are listed with the reason

What comes back

  • Articles and macros now wrong, with both quotes
  • Draft corrections per article
  • Questions for product where the release note is unclear
  • Record of what was re-checked per release

What to measure

  • Flags the knowledge manager accepts
  • Tickets caused by outdated articles
  • Time from release to corrected article
  • Units re-checked per release

Names of measures only. No result is claimed for this template.

Templates open in the workspace chat with the ask filled in. Nothing runs until you send it.

Get early accessSign in to use

A quarter of support tickets clustered into defects

For: Head of support or product operations lead reporting product problems to engineering

Tags are applied in a hurry and mean different things to different agents.

Pattern: Map, verify, reduceNeeds scale5 decisionsDesigned for 50 to 1,000 agents

Renewal risk review across the whole customer book

For: Head of customer success or renewals manager preparing the quarter's renewal plan

Health scores are a colour in a dashboard.

Pattern: Map, verify, reduceNeeds a connector5 decisionsDesigned for 30 to 600 agents