Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Tim Petrella's avatar

Great post, Scot. This lines up with what we keep seeing: the catalog isn't just under-fed, it's often written in the wrong language. The richest context to capture is how shoppers actually phrase the need, because that's what the agent matches on. A capable model can make the 'hot summer hike' to 'breathable mesh upper' leap one-off, but across thousands of SKUs it won't do it reliably, so the safer bet is feeding it the shopper's language directly instead of hoping it bridges the gap at scale.

Victor Garcia's avatar

The 'conversational attributes' shift is real and more disruptive than it looks on paper — we're seeing retailers with 5,000+ SKUs where the bottleneck isn't catalog size but attribute coverage: only 12–18% of products have enough contextual data to actually match mid-funnel AI queries, even after basic feed optimization. The four-lane model maps almost perfectly to what Ashish's team calls 'data strength' in the merchant health signals, which is now surfacing in Merchant Center Next diagnostics alongside the usual feed quality flags. The hard organizational problem is that Lane 2 (conversational attributes) requires product-level input from merchandising teams who have never thought in terms of 'occasions' or 'pairings' — that's where most implementations stall before they even test Context Capture.

No posts

Ready for more?