Aglet

Triage a search boost conflict before tuning results

A boosted result may satisfy a business policy while disappointing the person who typed the query. Triage the conflict as an ordering question. Capture the query, matched fields, boost or pin, selected sort, and result context before calling either signal wrong.

Establish what is happening

  1. Capture the ranked sample

    Save the query, filters, result order, matched fields, and active rule for the smallest representative set. Include an organic-looking query and a campaign or category context when both are involved. Do not rely on a screenshot without the ordering inputs.

  2. Name the competing promises

    Write what textual relevance suggests and what the business rule intends to surface. Compare the result title, category, freshness, availability, and user-selected sort. A visible promotion can be valid while still needing a label or separate placement.

  3. Bound the conflict

    State whether the issue is a bad rule, unclear sort expectation, missing context, or an unresolved tradeoff. Keep queries that behave correctly as controls. Route a true ordering conflict with its scope and confidence instead of changing a global boost.

What to carry forward

The triage record should show the ranked sample, competing ordering promises, active rule, and scope of conflict. Stop when another reviewer can reproduce the ordering. If the tradeoff is intentional but unclear, route copy or result grouping separately from relevance tuning.

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