Editorial draft available to read. Factual and language review is pending. Examples are illustrative.
Decision and method
Define a response explaining what is missing, what can be confirmed and which next step is available. Avoid both inventing an answer and ending with an empty refusal. Tailor clarification to the information actually needed to resolve the question rather than requesting an extensive list of details that currently serves no purpose.
Illustrative example
Illustrative example: a visitor asks whether an industrial machine supports a particular integration. The knowledge base does not cover that model. The assistant states the limit, explains that interface documentation is needed and requests the model and objective. It offers to prepare a technical inquiry without claiming compatibility or demanding machine credentials.
Acceptance check
Test missing, ambiguous and contradictory information. Check that the message distinguishes these cases and preserves context already supplied. Accept when the user understands why a definitive answer is unavailable and can continue with a proportionate action. Repeating the question should not transform the same information gap into an invented factual claim.
Key takeaways
- Acknowledging a limit is useful when it explains needed information and enables progress.