✓ Public documentation maintainers
✓ Small software teams evaluating a chatbot
✓ Editors building a repeatable answer review
— Private account actions
— Guaranteed factual correctness
— Replacing source owners with a widget
Name the default before importing
State which product release the public assistant serves and how older versions are handled. Version labels should be visible in source titles or content where practical, not only in an editor’s memory. If current and legacy instructions use the same feature name, record that ambiguity in the question set. Do not expect the model to infer the desired version from the newest-looking URL alone.
Separate archives from current instructions
Keep retired guides outside the default collection unless the assistant has a tested way to distinguish them. A public archive can remain useful to existing customers without being suitable for current answers. Where a legacy question is supported, require a clarifying question or an explicit version label. Document the policy so source editors and answer reviewers use the same boundary.
Test the confusing pair
Create a fictional pair of instructions: versionA uses a settings menu and versionB uses a workspace menu. Ask both a version-specific question and an unqualified question. Record the expected response for each before testing. This exposes whether the assistant blends steps or silently chooses a release. It is a test design example, not evidence that any named product does or does not handle versions correctly.
Retain a release comparison record
When the product changes, save the old expected answer beside the new one and identify which cases must be rerun. Do not overwrite past results in a way that makes a regression disappear. If the assistant cannot reliably separate versions, narrow its public remit or route legacy users to a stable article. A smaller trustworthy scope is more useful than a broad confident answer with mixed instructions.
- Add the expected default release to each unqualified question and retain an explicit legacy-version case for every important changed procedure.
Where the safety evidence stops
This guide draws on LangChain: evaluation datasets and reference answers. Merchant-controlled records describe the provider’s own capabilities, terms or standards; they do not independently validate those claims. These records do not establish independent confirmation of the product claims.
Verify any current price, plan limit, label direction, compatibility rule, or commercial term that would materially change the decision. The dated source ledger shows the underlying records so this conclusion can be checked and updated.
Sources used for this page
These records support the facts and comparisons above. Merchant-controlled records are labelled so you can separate product claims from independent evidence.
- LangChain: evaluation datasets and reference answers — Platform documentation · docs.langchain.com · Merchant-controlled · checked 2026-09-25