You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
When clicking the button in the bot, as shown in the debug response, the 'User Input' is being captured incorrectly, although the response is generated correctly. The 'User Input' is derived from the chaining rule of the response intent.
Here, the correct User Input should be: 'What information is needed for my last 2 years of employment?' However, in the debug response, the 'User Input' is recorded as 'rateresponse', this is getting from the chaining rule. This incorrect input text is also being stored in the chat history, making it impossible to retrieve the accurate user input text for the response.
Since the stack cannot be modified, what potential solutions can we implement in the Lambda function to address this issue?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
@preethy-1
It would be good to share the exact steps to reproduce so that we can help. Do you need the debug on, create a question with chaining, click on what?
Also what version? I would strongly suggest you use the issue template to make sure you are providing us a complete set of information
Hi,
When clicking the button in the bot, as shown in the debug response, the 'User Input' is being captured incorrectly, although the response is generated correctly. The 'User Input' is derived from the chaining rule of the response intent.
Here, the correct User Input should be: 'What information is needed for my last 2 years of employment?' However, in the debug response, the 'User Input' is recorded as 'rateresponse', this is getting from the chaining rule. This incorrect input text is also being stored in the chat history, making it impossible to retrieve the accurate user input text for the response.
Since the stack cannot be modified, what potential solutions can we implement in the Lambda function to address this issue?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: