Unanswered questions

We are working on a use case , where we get invoices from databricks , with requesters username, associated with that . what our current flow does is that , it fetches username for each invoice gets its email and fetches the profile of the user to get the email and region of the user and also to fetch the manager information to send the invoice escalation notification if an invoice hits deadline on that particular day. So the logic works in a way that it runs daily , and groups invoices based on their ages and as per the requester and managers and sends those to the respective people. This is flow is working successfully . But theres is a catch . On Biweekly Wednesdays we have the logic to pull all invoices above a certain number of days. So it fetches thousands of invoices on Biweekly wednesdays and then tries to process them. But while processing the script gives an error saying “ Deadline Exceeded” with the error code 6. As we are not calling any external API why is the code failing

Hello Team,I have recently created a Confluence connector and successfully ingested internal Confluence pages into our Moveworks bot. Most of the articles/pages were ingested without issues.However, I noticed that a restricted page in Confluence (with page-level permissions limiting access to certain users/groups) was not ingested by the connector.Could you please clarify if this is the expected behavior of the connector? Does the connector skip pages that have restrictions, or is there a way to include them in the ingestion process? 

Hi Moveworks Community,We are seeking guidance on how other teams are triaging and conducting quality assurance to ensure agents are providing accurate answers.We have a slightly unique use case. Our primary customer is our sales team, and users are connecting with a number of sales support teams (today 3 teams, eventually over 20 teams). The out of the box conversation tagging results in a significant portion of conversations being tagged as 'Other' which leads to a manual review. Current State: We read through every conversation, tag the Conversation ID and topic in a Google Sheet, then loop in the owners of the Knowledge Article docs to review and validate the answer from our agent is accurate. Ideal Future State: Sales topics are accurately tagged (Deal Desk, Legal, etc). Then our SMEs in each topic can review their associated conversations directly. From there, they would validate if the agent’s response was correct, if there is an issue and how it was resolved (eg; updated KB pag

I have a few plugins that collect information to fill out a ticket. The different fields to fill out are slots in the conversational process. The slots have a resolver strategy to pull the possible options from a api. I have the slots set to Infer slot value if possible. However inferring never actually works when a resolver strategy is applied.For a access management plugin, I can say I want access to <exact application name in system> and the plugin will show the first x options. It normally ends with the correct option and says things like, if you mean <exact application name in system> type “yes” or the number in the list. It however always makes the user confirm the option instead of inferring.I am getting around this by throwing a generate_structured_value_action at the beginning after asking for a description of the ask, but it is possible the user won’t provide enough information to determine the correct option and it feels like a hack when slots should be the answe

Is it possible to reference and manipulate a user attribute within a Content Activity? For example: grab a user’s email username@email.com and remove the @email.com so that it returns only username

Whenever I or others on my team use the Content Activity action in Conversational Process, the bot never actually sends a message to the user. What can I do to send a message to the user instead of having the bot always just infer what needs to be said?

ScenarioWe’re seeing a small but recurring UX gap in our Moveworks → UKG plugin flow and wanted to check if others have solved this or if there’s a recommended pattern.Current behavior User asks Moveworks to perform an action (example: approve timecard). Plugin detects expired/invalid OAuth token for UKG. Moveworks prompts the user to re-authorize via an auth link. After successful authorization, the user must explicitly type something like “retry approve timecard” to continue. Only then does the plugin re-execute the original action. From the user’s point of view, it feels broken or incomplete — they believe the task should continue automatically once access is granted.Expected / desired behaviorOnce the user completes authorization successfully: Moveworks should automatically resume the original plugin execution The user should not be required to type a manual “retry” command The experience should feel like a single continuous flow, not two separate conversations Question

We’re working on a use case where users request specific software, and our organization maintains a list of available software on a SharePoint site. Our solution uses a compound action: it fetches the software list via HTTP and script actions, then filters and displays results based on what the user asks. We’ve added both positive and negative utterances as well.The issue is that when someone asks for a particular software (for instance, “I need Teams”), our workflow works sometimes. But if the user says something like “I need to install Teams,” the system often triggers an internal plugin—such as installation help forms or knowledge base articles—instead of using our custom plugin. Even though our internal team has disabled some pre-built plugins, we still get unwanted results from forms. This means the intended custom plugin either fails or returns unnecessary or irrelevant information.Sometimes it works (“I need Teams” gives the right result), while other times, like with “I need to

Hi all, we have numerous (200+) PDF documents containing tables, and some consist entirely of a single table relating to rates etc. Editing these manually into a readable format for Moveworks would be very time-consuming for the various departments and would slow adoption. Is there a automation tool that can be used to edit and modify the tables for improved readability? How do other companies edit their existing and legacy documents? Thanks

Here's the situation we face when a user submits time through the Workday Portal: our bot can successfully approve or deny the time off. However, the problem happens when a user submits time directly through the bot. In these instances, the approval/denial process doesn't seem to work as expected. The error we get back is “This event step is not awaiting your action”. When I review the data through the RaaS report, it appears that working time-off requests have two true approvers, whereas those that are not working only have one. The API call we are using to request time off is /api/absenceManagement/v1/{{tenant}}/workers/{{worker_id}}/requestTimeOff.Has anyone experienced this issue before?

Hello,I would like to know if it is possible to add a clickable link for Live Agent Chat inside the Smart Handoff text.Right now, users first choose a team (for example, IT or Finance). Then they choose an option in the second drop-down (for example, “Finance Applications supported by EAS”). After they choose this option, a Smart Handoff text box appears with more details.Today, the Live Agent Chat is shown as a separate option in the drop-down list, and the link is hard coded under each domain. Instead, I would like the Smart Handoff text itself to include a clickable link that will start a live chat with an agent.In other words, when the Smart Handoff text appears (for example, for “Finance Applications supported by EAS”), I would like the phrase “Live Agent Chat” in that text to be a clickable link that opens the live chat.Is this possible to configure in Smart Handoff (for example, by adding a URL or action to the description text field). If yes, can you please share how to set thi

I have Plugin which is triggered from a webhook. Plugin sends the message to slack with 2 button.When a button is clicked the conversation process is to be kicked to start the conversation to the user. When Add Funds is clicked I need ask couple of questions to get the in put and send to an External API.this is the error msg i get when i validate it  Any pointers how this can be achieved will be really helpful

Hello EveryoneTrying ingest Unily , created connector as per https://help.moveworks.com/docs/content-integration-unily.But in internal knowledge ingestion , no wizard is coming up(not like we have during service now setup), and not able to ingest, can anyone guide on this the right way 

Hi All,I am trying to send a slack message from a plugin.I have a formatted HTML message coming as a part of json payload.as shown below:{"message": "<br>The below <b>Purchase Order</b> is set to expire in 90 days or less.<br> Please review the details, and then indicate if you would like to initiate a renewal or not.<br> • <b>PO Number</b>: <a href="https://www.google.com">PO1100004112</a><br> - <b>Requisition BU</b>: TEst, BU.<br> - <b>Supplier</b>: Test Supplier <br> - <b>Requester</b>: test.user@test.com<br> - <b>PO Description</b>: Test Support Fee<br> - <b>PO Total Amount</b>: 50,000.00<br> - <b>PO Remaining Amount</b>: 18,500.00<br> - <b>PO Expiration Date</b>: 31-Dec-2025","recipients": ["dhotre.virupaksha@airbnb.com"],"context": {"slots": {"messageId": "62cd4a70cf8011f0b478a201a1fa3

If you use a slot resolver for a conversational slot and set the Slot Inference Policy to Infer slot value if available, it will pull from the User Profile.. for example, their location from ingested user data.  This can be an issue for some plugins where similar data exist but has nothing to do with what the plugin is asking for.  It would also be beneficial to be able to define what each ingested element from the User Profile is, allowing context for Moveworks to better understand when to use those slots.Example:We’ve built a Conversation Flow where one input is a state, and we provide a list of states. If a state matches the user’s profile, the Infer slot value will automatically select that state instead of presenting the choice to the user—even if we add notes in the plugin description, conversation process, and input variable advising not to use the user profile location. This matters because the state they select is intended for a location they need information on, not necessari

 Hey team, we are set to roll out an update on KB gaps widgetTo improve the quality of Knowledge Gaps, new logic will only count interactions as KB gaps when Knowledge/Enterprise Search is considered and no other plugin is used (excluding Smart Handoff).With this update, Total interactions metric within each Topic will drop. Overall total interactions across all Topics will reduce by ~20-30%. This is expected, since the widget will now contain more refined KB gaps that customers can rely upon.

For People Lookup, it’s not recognizing our employees named “Wesley” as “Wes”. What are some ways for users to be able to look up Wes and found Wesley? Is it possible to set a conditional rule in “Source-Specific User Attribute Mapping” in Import User advanced setting so that anyone named Wesley can be recognized as Wes as well? Any ideas?

Hi Team,We have a usecase to build a solution to provision servers in Zscaler using MCP servers. We want to know if we have existing frameworks / connectors from Moveworks to MCP server to achieve these kind of usecases.

Data API throwing “API not found” errors for multiple Gov endpoints:https://api.moveworksgov.ai/export/v1beta2/records/interactions  https://api.moveworksgov.ai/export/v1beta1/records/interactions https://api.moveworksgov.ai/export/v1/records/interactions { "error": { "code": "NOT_FOUND", "message": "API not found" }}OAuth 2.0 token is working as expected (works with other APIs endpoints such as Events (previously) and Webhooks)This also fails from Data API tool: https://help.moveworks.com/reference/get_interactions-1 Question: Why might this be occurring? Are these endpoints live?