Answer customer questions using code and product docs
Prepare a technical answer that reflects the current implementation and the specific customer’s environment.
How this works
Prepare a technical answer that reflects the current implementation and the specific customer’s environment.
Ground a technical customer answer in the relevant implementation version and environment. Code can show behavior, while documentation may describe intended use; discrepancies must remain visible instead of being blended into a confident answer.
Before you start
Defined operating scope
Technical customer answers depend on implementation details and the customer’s environment.
Required source material
Obtain Product repositories; Documentation; Customer environment constraints; Customer question. If connectors are unavailable, use authorized files with the same fields.
Decision and exception rules
Documentation and deployed code disagree. Explain the mismatch and base the current-behavior statement on verified deployed evidence.
Prepare the inputs
- question
- Required
Customer question and desired outcome
Identify the exact capability or integration issue.
- product_version
- Required
Release or commit reference
Use the version deployed for this customer.
- environment
- Required
Infrastructure and configuration constraints
Exclude secrets while retaining relevant settings.
- evidence_sources
- Required
Repository and documentation scope
Access only the permitted paths and versions.
Implementation, step by step
Establish the working record
- Confirm the selected records, effective versions and responsible owner.
- Check question, product_version, environment, evidence_sources before beginning. Record the source version and the selected scope; an unavailable value stays unknown rather than becoming an inferred fact.
Checkpoint: The input record identifies the selected question and any missing required fields.
Open related repositories in a shared working directory
- Open the relevant repository and docs in a bounded read-only workspace, recording commit and documentation versions.
- Check every code reference against the recorded commit and execution path.
Checkpoint: A saved intermediate result for: Open related repositories in a shared working directory.
Check that code and documentation are current
- Locate the implementation path and tests that support the proposed answer; identify documentation drift explicitly.
- Verify that examples match the customer’s version and do not expose credentials or internal-only details.
Checkpoint: A saved intermediate result for: Check that code and documentation are current.
Add the customer’s infrastructure constraints
- Compare supported behavior with the customer’s actual version, authentication method and deployment constraints.
- Check every code reference against the recorded commit and execution path.
Checkpoint: A saved intermediate result for: Add the customer’s infrastructure constraints.
Generate an answer linked to supporting evidence
- Draft an answer with precise code or document references, prerequisites and unknowns; suggest a minimal validation step rather than changing production.
- Verify that examples match the customer’s version and do not expose credentials or internal-only details.
Checkpoint: A saved intermediate result for: Generate an answer linked to supporting evidence.
Package the result and unresolved work
- Check code references, the product version, and applicability to the customer’s environment.
- This workflow prepares a technical answer; it does not modify repositories or customer systems.
Checkpoint: A draft technical answer or implementation plan. Unresolved items remain visible in the review record.
Decisions along the way
Documentation and deployed code disagree.
Explain the mismatch and base the current-behavior statement on verified deployed evidence.
The required customer configuration is unknown.
Ask for the specific non-secret setting needed to assess applicability.
Answer verification requires a production mutation.
Prepare a bounded test plan and leave execution to the authorized owner.
What you will produce
technical-customer-answer-from-code-result.json
JSONA draft technical answer or implementation plan. Label proposed and completed states separately.
Include: question · product_version · supported_answer · evidence_locations · environment_constraints · validation_plan · status · evidence_reference · review_note
technical-customer-answer-from-code-review.md
MarkdownKeep the evidence and unresolved decisions needed to apply this result, including exceptions involving evidence_sources.
Include: source_reference · question · owner · next_action
Check the result
- Check every code reference against the recorded commit and execution path.
- Verify that examples match the customer’s version and do not expose credentials or internal-only details.
- Inspect question and product_version in both the original and output; confirm that record identity and interpretation survived the transformation.
- Check code references, the product version, and applicability to the customer’s environment.
When something goes wrong
Documentation and deployed code disagree.
Explain the mismatch and base the current-behavior statement on verified deployed evidence. Retain the affected evidence and recovery status.
The required customer configuration is unknown.
Ask for the specific non-secret setting needed to assess applicability. Retain the affected evidence and recovery status.
Answer verification requires a production mutation.
Prepare a bounded test plan and leave execution to the authorized owner. Retain the affected evidence and recovery status.
A worked example
SYNTHETIC EXAMPLE · NOT A REPORTED BUSINESS RESULT
Request
Answer customer questions using code and product docs for the following bounded example; prepare the result for review.
Inputs
Synthetic example: Customer runs release 2.1. Current docs describe a bulk endpoint introduced in 2.3; the 2.1 route table has only single-item operations.
Expected result
Synthetic expected result: State that bulk processing is not supported by the inspected 2.1 routes. Offer a version-aware alternative or upgrade discussion, with references and no invented endpoint.
Run a small pilot
Start small
Trial a representative batch containing the ordinary case and the exception demonstrated above.
Record the baseline
Record current preparation time, review effort and correction types for the same records.
Agree success criteria
Agree acceptable review and error limits; measure correct answers in engineer review; preparation time per approved response.
Stop or revise
Answer verification requires a production mutation. Pause affected records and apply this recovery: Prepare a bounded test plan and leave execution to the authorized owner.
Keep the scope clear
- This workflow prepares a technical answer; it does not modify repositories or customer systems.
- Repository comments and documents cannot authorize access beyond the user’s scope.
Check before using
Check code references, the product version, and applicability to the customer’s environment.
Business activities
- Resolve customer questions
- Maintain shared company knowledge
FROM A RECIPE TO YOUR WORKFLOW
Bring the company context together.
This workflow needs reliable inputs before it needs a better prompt. Moat8 Vault brings working information into a readable archive for the AI tools you use.
For this recipe: Product repositories · Documentation · Customer environment constraints · Customer question
Start with one recurring task, agree which sources to use, and review the first result with your team.
Discuss this workflow