Decide where the work belongs
Name the decision blocked
Describe the tuning, support, or product choice that lacks evidence. Compare a missing field match with an unexplained promotion or freshness rule. Keep an unusual query separate from a factor that affects many contexts.
Compare evidence surfaces
Set matched-field highlights, factor summaries, rule provenance, sample traces, and copy explanations beside one another. Consider reader comprehension and sensitive data. Prefer a surface that answers the review question without promising a complete score decomposition.
Choose the first slice
Record query family, factors, owner, and revisit evidence. Decide whether to instrument, document, tune, or leave behavior unchanged. Preserve the disputed sample and a clear ranking control so the queue decision can be reassessed.
What to carry forward
Prioritize explanation work where ranking decisions repeat without a trustworthy reason. The decision should name query scope and the smallest evidence surface. If a factor is already visible and only the result expectation is unclear, prioritize labeling or sort copy instead.
Technical background: Elastic documentation.
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