Aglet

Investigate product search intent drift with a reproducible brief

An investigation should explain when a query changes jobs and which search boundary fails first. Replay representative phrases with the same entry point and filters, compare result classes, and test an alternative scope without assuming that a low click rate proves poor relevance.

Build a useful investigation brief

  1. Build a query journey set

    Select phrases that begin in the catalog, help, and account surfaces. For each, capture the submitted text, filters, result types, first selection, reformulation, and exit. Include a query that behaves as expected so the comparison has a control.

  2. Test the scope hypothesis

    Hold the phrase fixed while varying the index or result grouping that a person can see. Compare whether the desired answer becomes findable and whether unrelated results rise. Record negative results; a support click alone does not identify the routing mechanism.

  3. Write the intent brief

    State the observed journey, the first divergent boundary, and competing explanations such as wording, index scope, or result ordering. Link each claim to a replay. Recommend the smallest follow-up that would separate the remaining hypotheses.

What to carry forward

A complete brief names the query family, entry context, result classes, and first scope boundary with replayable evidence. Stop when one explanation fits the selected sample or when the unresolved branch is explicit. Do not label a ranking defect when the evidence only shows an intent mismatch.

Technical background: Digital.gov guidance.

Keep the decision with the work.

Use a Work Item in Aglet to record the problem, the evidence you have, and the next decision. Add an owner and priority, then keep updates in the discussion so the next person can follow the reasoning.

Create an account See the product workflow