Skip to content

Conversation

@benironside
Copy link
Contributor

@benironside benironside commented Dec 20, 2025

Addresses #4204, and partly addresses #522 by creating a new page in the explore-analyze AI section that describes the new AI Agent chat experience, and informs users about how to opt in to it in 9.3, and the feature differences.

I put the new page in a new subsection in the AI section we've been working on, in a new folder called ai-chat-experiences.

Generative AI disclosure

  1. Did you use a generative AI (GenAI) tool to assist in creating this contribution?
  • Yes
  • [ x] No

Live preview: https://docs-v3-preview.elastic.dev/elastic/docs-content/pull/4438/explore-analyze/ai-features/ai-chat-experiences/ai-agent-or-ai-assistant

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Dec 20, 2025

Vale Linting Results

Summary: 1 warning, 12 suggestions found

⚠️ Warnings (1)
File Line Rule Message
explore-analyze/ai-features/ai-chat-experiences/ai-assistant.md 46 Elastic.DontUse Don't use 'just'.
💡 Suggestions (12)
File Line Rule Message
explore-analyze/ai-features/ai-chat-experiences/ai-agent-or-ai-assistant.md 21 Elastic.FutureTense 'will power' might be in future tense. Write in the present tense to describe the state of the product as it is now.
explore-analyze/ai-features/ai-chat-experiences/ai-agent-or-ai-assistant.md 38 Elastic.FutureTense 'will prompt' might be in future tense. Write in the present tense to describe the state of the product as it is now.
explore-analyze/ai-features/ai-chat-experiences/ai-assistant.md 44 Elastic.FutureTense 'will be' might be in future tense. Write in the present tense to describe the state of the product as it is now.
explore-analyze/ai-features/ai-chat-experiences/ai-assistant.md 46 Elastic.FirstPerson Avoid first-person pronouns such as 'me'.
explore-analyze/ai-features/ai-chat-experiences/ai-assistant.md 48 Elastic.Wordiness Consider using 'also' instead of 'In addition'.
explore-analyze/ai-features/ai-chat-experiences/ai-assistant.md 50 Elastic.FirstPerson Avoid first-person pronouns such as ' I '.
explore-analyze/ai-features/ai-chat-experiences/ai-assistant.md 51 Elastic.FirstPerson Avoid first-person pronouns such as ' I '.
explore-analyze/ai-features/ai-chat-experiences/ai-assistant.md 54 Elastic.FutureTense 'will be' might be in future tense. Write in the present tense to describe the state of the product as it is now.
explore-analyze/ai-features/ai-chat-experiences/ai-assistant.md 56 Elastic.WordChoice Consider using 'can, might' instead of 'may', unless the term is in the UI.
explore-analyze/ai-features/ai-chat-experiences/ai-assistant.md 56 Elastic.WordChoice Consider using 'can, might' instead of 'may', unless the term is in the UI.
explore-analyze/ai-features/ai-chat-experiences/ai-assistant.md 56 Elastic.FutureTense 'will keep' might be in future tense. Write in the present tense to describe the state of the product as it is now.
explore-analyze/ai-features/ai-chat-experiences/ai-assistant.md 56 Elastic.Wordiness Consider using 'before' instead of 'prior to'.

The Vale linter checks documentation changes against the Elastic Docs style guide.

To use Vale locally or report issues, refer to Elastic style guide for Vale.

Copy link
Contributor

@leemthompo leemthompo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for getting the ball rolling on this! I know the PR is very preliminary but since we last chatted a lot of previously open questions are now basically answered, so hopefully these little notes will help clarify a few things :-)

@leemthompo leemthompo changed the title Switch to AI Agent intro doc Add "Switch to Agent Builder" intro doc for AI assistant users Dec 22, 2025
@leemthompo leemthompo changed the title Add "Switch to Agent Builder" intro doc for AI assistant users Add "Switch to Agent Builder" doc for AI assistants Dec 22, 2025
@florent-leborgne florent-leborgne self-requested a review January 7, 2026 11:52
@florent-leborgne
Copy link
Contributor

florent-leborgne commented Jan 7, 2026

Based on our sync yesterday, here are the todos:

  • Comparison tables: also list what's in Agent Builder to show its value and not present it as a "limited AI Assistant"
  • Comparison tables: check what is the state of AI Assistant in the Search solution and if required make it clear in that new page and table
  • Make sure we're explicit about how to opt-in, and how to opt-out/revert
  • Gather the comparison page and the AI Assistants page under an "AI chat experiences" new page to create that will better present this concept and give more structure to the AI capabilities section
  • Rework the intro narrative to explain Agent Builder's purpose and value, as well as introduce the various terms since there will be different ones that ultimately all resolve to Agent Builder, to avoid user confusion. (@leemthompo to suggest)
  • Mention APIs and OOB tools (and introduce them or link to them)

Copy link
Contributor

@florent-leborgne florent-leborgne left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Mostly LGTM from a docs standpoint - Thanks for all of the changes curious to get product eyes on this before formally approving (around naming between AI Agent/Agent Builder, overall presentation of things, messaging, etc.)

Maybe one thing missing would be to be able to link to a list of OOB agents (maybe after this PR if that doesn't exist yet--Do we have issues created for documenting/auto-generating docs for them?)

@leemthompo
Copy link
Contributor

link to list of OOB agents

yeah that will be a follow-up, issue is here https://github.com/elastic/docs-content-internal/issues/633

@mdbirnstiehl mdbirnstiehl requested a review from sorenlouv January 9, 2026 16:35
Copy link
Contributor

@leemthompo leemthompo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM. We can finetune the intro wording based on product/eng/design team's feedback, but I think this page is fit-for-purpose now. Thanks for driving this Ben!

We can merge this in hidden mode, because this won't go live in next week's serverless release.

ℹ️ For other reviewers, know that we'll be documenting the standalone versus flyout mode UX differences in the main AB docs (PR is in draft).

- file: ai-features/llm-guides/connect-to-lmstudio-security.md
- file: ai-features/llm-guides/connect-to-vLLM.md
- hidden: ai-features/ai-agent-or-ai-assistant.md
- file: ai-features/ai-chat-experiences/ai-agent-or-ai-assistant.md
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

update: we can keep this hidden because won't go live in serverless until week after next :)

Copy link
Contributor

@mdbirnstiehl mdbirnstiehl left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM!

Comment on lines 15 to 17
::::{admonition} Requirements
{{agent-builder}} requires an **Enterprise [license](/deploy-manage/license.md)**.
::::
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we want to call the license level out explicitly?

Relevant Slack thread that you started, @benironside 😝

Copy link
Contributor

@leemthompo leemthompo Jan 12, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

tl;dr we need to be explicit here, it's an exception, because there are SDHs (and there's nothing on the subs page) :)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
::::{admonition} Requirements
{{agent-builder}} requires an **Enterprise [license](/deploy-manage/license.md)**.
::::
::::{admonition} Requirements
{{agent-builder}} requires an **Enterprise [subscription](/deploy-manage/license.md)**.
::::

Let's say subscription; Let's also figure out what the prereq is for Serverless and include it here too, because the subscription level has no effect on serverless feature availability (it's the feature tier of the project that does)

Copy link
Contributor

@leemthompo leemthompo Jan 12, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

it will be Complete feature tier for Obs and Search

we might be able to just use the old generic wording here though once the subs pages are updated

I'm operating on the assumption that those pages won't be updated until 9.3 releases, so we'd need temporary, exceptionall explicit note until then to cover the earlier serverless availability 😅

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Updated the language here. Let me know what you all think

@KodeRad
Copy link

KodeRad commented Jan 12, 2026

I am not sure if we do want to use Agent Builder name instead of Agent / AI Agent

@florent-leborgne
Copy link
Contributor

I am not sure if we do want to use Agent Builder name instead of Agent / AI Agent

@KodeRad I think we need a smart(er) combination of both so that users can properly identify what we're talking about here, and also make the connection with the overall Agent Builder concept, which is important too.

@KodeRad
Copy link

KodeRad commented Jan 12, 2026

I am not sure if we do want to use Agent Builder name instead of Agent / AI Agent

@KodeRad I think we need a smart(er) combination of both so that users can properly identify what we're talking about here, and also make the connection with the overall Agent Builder concept, which is important too.

That's true 👍 We need both. Just want to make sure we are using it correctly.

@dhru42
Copy link
Contributor

dhru42 commented Jan 12, 2026

@benironside can you add "Integration with Elastic Workflows" into the comparison table.

for this category it would be a yes for Agent Builder, no for Security AI Assistant. thank you!

@isaclfreire
Copy link

Nit: I think AI insights were added to Security (at least based on AI Assistant IIUC) in 9.3 by the entity analysis team, if we want to add it to the table

Copy link
Contributor

@kilfoyle kilfoyle left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM for the admin part! 🦘

@benironside benironside merged commit 4c3b166 into main Jan 15, 2026
8 checks passed
@benironside benironside deleted the 4204-AI-agent-introduction branch January 15, 2026 18:33
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

10 participants