Help center Knowledge base and KCS Flag an article for update and resolve suggestions Updated Wednesday, October 28, 2026 · Marcel Gravelle Article suggestions turn an agent’s discovery into a visible maintenance request. Use them for an incorrect step, an outdated control, a missing scenario, or an unclear explanation. This feedback process is separate from submitting a new article version for publication review. At a glanceFor: agents, knowledge contributors, and suggestion reviewers. Applies to: Supportbench Core.Start here: Open an article → Flag for update or Suggestions Submit a useful suggestion · Review and close the request · Understand the permissions and messages · Submit feedback that an author can act on · Common problems Submit a useful suggestion Open the article and choose Flag for update. If it already has an open suggestion, use View / add feedback to add evidence to that request.Select the configured Reason for update. Identify the exact step or claim, what happened, and the corrected behavior or safe reproduction if known.Keep the initial explanation within the form’s limit. Do not paste credentials, private customer logs, or unrelated case history.Choose Flag for update to save. Review the resulting request in Suggestions.If a closed request does not cover a distinct remaining problem, use Start a new suggestion.Make the request actionable“Step 3 says choose the old menu name. In Core, the command is in the activity toolbar; the remaining steps work.” is more useful than “This article is bad.” Include enough context for a reviewer to reproduce the mismatch without needing the customer’s private data. Review and close the request Open the article’s Suggestions tab and choose Review suggestion on the current request.Choose the appropriate state: New, In Progress, Done / Completed, or Rejected. Mark work in progress when someone is actually responsible for the correction.Use a private Reviewer note for internal review context. Use Message to requester for the explanation the requester should receive; a rejection requires that message.Choose Update. A closing message is delivered in Supportbench and can be emailed when the requester’s email alerts are enabled.When a correction was needed, verify the resulting article version. Closing a suggestion does not itself prove that the article body was corrected and published. Understand the permissions and messages CapabilityPurposeFlag articles for reviewSubmit a content-maintenance suggestion.Administer flagged articlesReview and manage suggestions.Article editing/publishingChange and publish the article itself; these are separate capabilities.Only one open suggestion is maintained for an article, so add relevant evidence to the existing discussion. A private reviewer note is not included in the closure notification; do not put private reasoning into the requester message expecting it to remain internal. Submit feedback that an author can act on A useful suggestion says exactly where the reader became stuck and what a successful article would explain. It is more helpful than “this article is bad,” and it does not require the requester to know the final fix.Example: missing terminal instructions“In the Supportbench MCP Codex setup article, the step says to run a CLI command. I am helping a first-time Windows user. The article does not explain that the command goes into PowerShell, how to open it, or that Codex CLI must be installed. Please add those prerequisites, the expected result after Enter, and recovery for ‘codex is not recognized.’ The server URL/token distinction should remain explicit.”For a wrong product step, include the article ID/title, heading or step number, the relevant Core screen/version, expected versus actual result, and redacted evidence. Do not attach a screenshot containing a token or customer record merely to prove that a label differs.Open the article and use Flag for update when available. Review any existing open suggestion first so the same issue is not fragmented.Describe the specific gap and desired reader outcome, then submit.The reviewer reads the full context, checks the current product and either makes the correction or explains why it is not appropriate.When closing the request, provide a clear requester-facing result, such as “Added Windows terminal prerequisites and a command-not-found recovery step; please retry the procedure.”If rejecting it, explain the relevant reason and the appropriate route. Avoid private internal commentary in a message the requester receives.A closed suggestion is not proof that retrieval improved. If the original problem was “Co-Pilot cannot find this answer,” repeat the original query and follow-up after the article update. Common problems ProblemChecks and correctionFlag for update is missingCheck the relevant role permission and article access.There is already an open requestUse View / add feedback and add the missing evidence.A reviewer cannot reject the requestProvide the required Message to requester.The requester still sees incorrect contentCheck whether the corrected version actually completed authoring review and publication.The same issue returns repeatedlyImprove the procedure’s verification step and maintenance ownership, rather than only closing repeated suggestions. Continue learning Find the right knowledge articleCreate, review, and publish an articlePractice KCS Was this article helpful? Yes No Thank you for your feedback.