A product record was updated this morning. Can a shopping agent therefore treat everything in it as current? Perhaps only the image changed. The price is from yesterday, stock comes from an overnight export, and compatibility comes from an old data sheet.
A timestamp on the whole product hides those differences. Useful decisions need context for each decisive claim: What does it refer to? Who supports it? When was it checked? Which action does it permit?
Start with a decision
A fictional office equipment supplier sells label rolls for several printers. A customer needs supplies for printer P40, revision C. The product name matches. However, an older supplier document lists a different core fitting from the current data sheet. Meanwhile, the feed still reports stock even though the warehouse has reserved the last carton.
The merchant faces two different problems. Suitability is disputed. Availability is outdated. A general quality label such as “medium” answers neither question.
The appropriate response differs accordingly: Have a specialist resolve compatibility and query stock again immediately. Only then can the merchant decide whether to prepare an offer.
Keep evidence and freshness separate
Track the evidence status separately from freshness. Three evidence states are sufficient to start: confirmed, unknown and conflicting. A confirmed attribute can have the value “no”. “Unknown” does not mean “no”, and a required attribute must not silently turn into “yes” either.
For freshness, distinguish between within the defined validity period, expired and validity unresolved. A document retrieved just now can contain conflicting information. Confirmed information can have expired. Both dimensions affect the next action.
These states are a proposed internal working model. They do not establish a new protocol standard and need not be exported unchanged through every external interface.
The field contract
Create a small table for decisive attributes. It can initially live in the existing data model or a manageable working list.
| Component | Label roll example |
|---|---|
| Precise claim | Fits printer P40, revision C |
| Object referred to | Item, variant and packaging unit identified unambiguously |
| Value and evidence status | Unresolved; two sources conflict |
| Responsible source | Approved manufacturer documentation for this revision |
| Source version and review | Document identifier, version and date of specialist review |
| Review trigger | New manufacturer documentation or a changed product revision |
| Consequence for the agent | Do not claim a confirmed fit; explain what needs clarification |
| Responsible team | Product management for the category |
The contract for stock looks different. The responsible source is the current availability service; the purchase decision requires the agreed stock check or reservation. A customer specific price also needs customer context, currency, quantity and offer validity.
Avoid a blanket rule such as “refresh all data daily”. The right freshness depends on the decision and how the source changes. A material attribute and the last available carton need different treatment.
A newer document does not automatically win
When two sources conflict, first establish whether they describe the same variant. Perhaps the newer document applies to revision D. One figure may refer to the inner diameter and the other to the outer diameter. Simply taking the newest value can turn a visible conflict into an invisible error.
Keep both sources until a specialist resolves the issue. The responsible person records the decision and its scope. The affected claims can then be updated specifically.
Derived claims need a path back to their evidence
“Core diameter 25 millimetres” and “the printer supports this fitting” can lead to a recommendation. If either premise becomes invalid, that recommendation needs to be reassessed too.
Record which decisive claims depend on which sources. A corrected product attribute should reach more than the detail page. Check the search index, feed, advice components and offers already prepared. A cache can be technically up to date while containing a claim that is no longer valid.
Orders already confirmed need a separate case review. Silently changing the product page does not inform the affected customer.
Match the customer message to the state
With confirmed suitability, the agent can explain the appropriate variant. If the printer revision is missing, it asks specifically for it. When sources conflict, it explains what remains unresolved and how it will be clarified. With outdated stock, it refreshes availability before promising delivery.
Public structured data also has specific meanings. Schema.org describes priceValidUntil as the date after which a price is no longer available. That field alone does not describe a stock reservation or replace a complete field contract. Schema.org: priceValidUntil
A practical failure test
Select five product claims that affect a decision. In a test environment, let a price expire, remove a compatibility source and change the available quantity. Then inspect advice, the feed and offer preparation separately.
Can the team explain which claim can still be used and who resolves the open question? That makes uncertainty manageable. Going forward, track recommendations with an unresolved required attribute and the time taken to clarify them. The proportion of completed fields alone does not answer these questions.
Chapter 5: Being found before anyone visits the shop explains the strategic context. Chapter 11: From copilot to autonomous shop operations connects product knowledge with internal work.