Turn repeated chat questions into approved FAQs

The decision this workflow supports

Repeated questions can reveal that a page or approved answer is missing useful information. The improvement process should use the question pattern, not copy private conversation details into a public FAQ or publish an unreviewed answer.

Put the review process in place

Group similar unanswered questions and ask the relevant restaurant owner to write or approve a response. Identify the source and review date. Test the new answer against a straightforward question and a nearby question it should not answer, so the wording does not expand beyond its scope.

Worked example for your team

Suppose several fictional test chats ask where guests should enter a courtyard restaurant. The owner approves a short entrance description and the content reviewer adds it to the FAQ. Test the direct entrance question, then a different question about a particular access arrangement. The first can use the approved description; the second still needs staff review. If the assistant treats the new FAQ as a general assurance about every access need, narrow the wording. One useful answer should not silently expand the assistant’s authority beyond what the owner actually approved.

Sample wording to approve

“Approved FAQ draft: [question] — [owner-reviewed answer]. If your situation differs from the information shown, restaurant staff can review your specific request before confirming any arrangement.” This wording is a draft for the restaurant owner to approve before use.

Fields for the staff handoff

Staff need question pattern, proposed answer, source owner, approval date, and boundary test. Mark uncertain details explicitly and keep the requested action separate from anything restaurant staff have already confirmed.

Acceptance tests before use

The FAQ contains no private guest details. A nearby unsupported question still reaches staff. The approved wording appears consistently on the site and in chat. Record the observed result, assign any mismatch, and repeat the affected scenario after correction.

Related guides