Skip to main content
New Idea

Please Have Documentation Match Product Functionality

Related products:CS Rules Engine
  • September 1, 2022
  • 7 replies
  • 112 views
jason_metzler
nancy_bray
colleen_fleming
phani_kumar
matthew_lind
+44
  • jason_metzler
    jason_metzler
  • nancy_bray
    nancy_bray
  • colleen_fleming
    colleen_fleming
  • phani_kumar
    phani_kumar
  • matthew_lind
    matthew_lind
  • cmultanen
    cmultanen
  • seth
    seth
  • tom_gerth
    tom_gerth
  • alex_legay
    alex_legay
  • heather_hansen
    heather_hansen
  • kelly
    kelly
  • darkknight
    darkknight
  • spencer_engel
    spencer_engel
  • pamela_mackie
    pamela_mackie
  • tim_van_lew
    tim_van_lew
  • sacha
    sacha
  • ana_g
  • alisapagerduty
  • acote
    acote
  • davebrown2242
    davebrown2242
  • andreammelde
    andreammelde
  • Jef Vanlaer
    Jef Vanlaer
  • tammy_c
  • TMaier
    TMaier
  • tracyhigginsyoung
  • mr255405
    mr255405
  • cankney
    cankney
  • jivanova
  • bradley
    bradley
  • JKinchen
    JKinchen
  • gschardan
  • tmorgan
    tmorgan
  • sarahmiracle
    sarahmiracle
  • romihache
    romihache
  • chelseahopkins
    chelseahopkins
  • jkolle
  • alizee
    alizee
  • CarollynnC
    CarollynnC
  • One_Tew
    One_Tew
  • Elana Cipin
  • Ravindrach
  • jparker
    jparker
  • kppatel
  • jenlpro
    jenlpro
  • bmayden
    bmayden
  • Veronica.Moore
  • prithvivihari11
  • prashant pareek
  • AaronOl

bradley

This is specifically about the new rollout of the Cockpit and Task Real Time Rule action, but really this should be treated more as an example than a request to just fix one thing, hence the generic title.

 

The fact that Real Time Rules doesn’t support Custom Events is a pretty important detail that should have made it directly into the release notes. Custom events are supported on other action types so there wouldn’t be a reason to think they would not be supported and should be called out here:

 

If you follow the link to Events in Real-Time Rules you scroll down and see this:

 

No particular call out that Custom isn’t supported, it’s just not listed. It really should be explicitly mentioned it is not supported. 

In my instance however, I have the option for custom:

 

Maybe they forgot to add it to the docs as a supported action? After all, the fact that it’s being rolled out incrementally was added later.

It’s not called out anywhere but it’s here on my list. No indication at this point it wouldn’t work. Until you try and add a field, then you see this:

 

 

I’ve already made a post here about it and I hope it’s already on the roadmap, but clarity in documentation is super important and I’m just not seeing that. There’s also discrepancies around the actual functionality of some fields in an object which isn’t a great place to be either.

 

An enterprise level platform needs accurate, reliable, and trustworthy documentation. With a quarterly release, time and resources need to be baked in to make sure that that happens.

7 replies

anirbandutta
Forum|alt.badge.img+2
  • Expert ⭐️
  • 1804 replies
  • September 2, 2022

Hello @bradley thanks for the roundup, this is definitely a longer term initiative to bridge the gap across the board. We acknowledge and are meeting internally to address this.


darkknight
Forum|alt.badge.img+4
  • Expert ⭐️
  • 1980 replies
  • September 2, 2022

bradley
Forum|alt.badge.img+7
  • Author
  • Expert ⭐️
  • 1130 replies
  • September 2, 2022
anirbandutta wrote:

Hello @bradley thanks for the roundup, this is definitely a longer term initiative to bridge the gap across the board. We acknowledge and are meeting internally to address this.

Good to hear - I mention it in the post but just to reiterate that the body of the post are just examples, not an exhaustive list. While I’m sure it is a long-term effort I hope perfection doesn’t become the enemy of progress at least for near-term incremental improvements.


Uzma Gani
Forum|alt.badge.img
  • Gainsight Employee ⭐️
  • 6 replies
  • September 8, 2022

Hi @bradley, We appreciate your feedback and would take this into consideration to reassess our strategy going forward. For now, we have made the relevant changes in the Events in Real-Time Rules article to reflect the updates. Thanks & Regards.

FYI @rakesh @Adrian Raposo 


bradley
Forum|alt.badge.img+7
  • Author
  • Expert ⭐️
  • 1130 replies
  • September 8, 2022
Uzma Gani wrote:

Hi @bradley, We appreciate your feedback and would take this into consideration to reassess our strategy going forward. For now, we have made the relevant changes in the Events in Real-Time Rules article to reflect the updates. Thanks & Regards.

FYI @rakesh @Adrian Raposo 

Saw the updates, thanks! Documentation is also referenced in exam study guides as well, and looking at a couple of the ones linked here in this guide are out of date.


bradley
Forum|alt.badge.img+7
  • Author
  • Expert ⭐️
  • 1130 replies
  • October 2, 2024

@jake_ellis @dstokowski re: documentation and release notes I stumbled across this two year old post


jake_ellis
Forum|alt.badge.img+4
  • Gainsight Employee ⭐️⭐️
  • 59 replies
  • October 3, 2024

Great point @bradley and we’ll continue to work on calling out limitations and align product functionality with documentation. cc: @ophirsw @shayerisen 


Reply


Cookie policy

We use cookies to enhance and personalize your experience. If you accept you agree to our full cookie policy. Learn more about our cookies.

 
Cookie settings