Context facts cost network traffic on every Oso

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

Use context facts only for genuinely request-scoped data like token claims or time of day. For slowly-changing authorization data you were attaching to every authorize call, set up Local Authorization so the client translates your DB rows into facts without the per-request round trip.

Steps

1. Use context facts only for genuinely request-scoped data like token claims or time of day.
2. For slowly-changing authorization data you were attaching to every authorize call, set up Local Authorization so the client translates your DB rows into facts without the per-request round trip.

When to use

You are seeing this: Context facts are passed with each authorize call (in the TypeScript SDK as an optional fourth argument) and exist only for the request, which is perfect for IDP claims or ephemeral attributes. Use this skill when you run into "Context facts cost network traffic on every Oso Cloud request".

When not to use

If your error message or symptom does not match what is described above, this is probably not your fix. Search for your exact error text instead of forcing this one to fit.

Versions

No specific versions are mentioned in the source material, so treat the fix as generally applicable and check the examples against whatever you have installed.

Why this happens

The original report does not dig into a root cause. It documents the symptom and the fix that resolved it.

Source: Official docs (Send data as context facts, Oso Cloud): documents a gotcha that trips agents feeding data to authorization checks. Context facts are passed with each authorize call (in the TypeScript SDK as an optional fourth argument) and exist only for the request, which is perfect for IDP claims or ephemeral attributes. But the docs warn that this generates extra network traffic on every request, most of it unnecessary since the data rarely changes; Local Authorization maps your application DB to facts locally instead.

Verified resolution: Use context facts only for genuinely request-scoped data like token claims or time of day. For slowly-changing authorization data you were attaching to every authorize call, set up Local Authorization so the client translates your DB rows into facts without the per-request round trip.

Source URL: https://www.osohq.com/docs/learn/guides/adopt-local-authorization/data-as-context-facts

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

Oso Cloud centralizes facts for cross-service lookups, but the docs explicitly say to keep frequently-changing, high-cardinality data (like millions of files) and single-service data in the application DB instead.

Steps

1. Before pushing data into Oso Cloud, sort it: roles and global attributes go to Oso Cloud, high-cardinality or fast-changing data stays in your DB, and request-scoped values like the client IP or IDP token claims ride along as context facts that live only for the request. Syncing everything centrally buys you drift and sync jobs you did not need.

When to use

You are seeing this: Before pushing data into Oso Cloud, sort it: roles and global attributes go to Oso Cloud, high-cardinality or fast-changing data stays in your DB, and request-scoped values like the client IP or IDP token claims ride along as context facts that live only... Use this skill when you run into "Dont centralize high-cardinality facts in Oso Cloud".

When not to use

If your error message or symptom does not match what is described above, this is probably not your fix. Search for your exact error text instead of forcing this one to fit.

Versions

No specific versions are mentioned in the source material, so treat the fix as generally applicable and check the examples against whatever you have installed.

Why this happens

The original report does not dig into a root cause. It documents the symptom and the fix that resolved it.

Source: Official docs (Overview of Facts, Oso Cloud): documents a gotcha that trips agents modeling authorization data. Oso Cloud centralizes facts for cross-service lookups, but the docs explicitly say to keep frequently-changing, high-cardinality data (like millions of files) and single-service data in the application DB instead. Centralize org and resource roles plus global flags like issuperadmin or isbanned; send ephemeral request data like IP or time of day as context facts.

Verified resolution: Before pushing data into Oso Cloud, sort it: roles and global attributes go to Oso Cloud, high-cardinality or fast-changing data stays in your DB, and request-scoped values like the client IP or IDP token claims ride along as context facts that live only for the request. Syncing everything centrally buys you drift and sync jobs you did not need.

Source URL: https://www.OSOHQ.COM/docs/develop/facts/overview

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

Fix this in Search check agent by acting on the exact symptom first: check queries against the search log extract for those queries only, load the top results per query as titles and snippets, and pull a full article only when its snippet is ambiguous. Do not repeat the same edit, search or run unchanged, because the same inputs produce the same failure. Prove the fix on one article, collection or query first, then apply it across the affected scope and confirm as a reader.

Context overflow checking search results with full account history

Use this when

• Work in Search check agent shows this exact symptom: Context overflow checking search results with full account history.
• The same symptom repeats after a retry with unchanged inputs.
• Readers or support agents are blocked until this item is corrected.

Not for this skill when

• The help center platform itself is down or returning outage notices. Resolve that first, then return here if this symptom remains.
• The content is correct and you only want a style or tone rewrite. That is an editorial pass, not this fix.

Steps

1. Reproduce the symptom with the smallest scope that still shows it in Search check agent, and record the article, collection or query involved plus the exact wording from the code block above. Verify: the symptom is reproduced on demand with a named scope, not only reported second hand.
2. Apply the specific fix for this symptom: check queries against the search log extract for those queries only, load the top results per query as titles and snippets, and pull a full article only when its snippet is ambiguous. Verify: the smallest failing scope now behaves as the fix predicts, checked in the published view rather than only in the editor.
3. Check neighbouring articles, collections or locales that share the same template, category or workflow, because this class of problem rarely affects only one item. Verify: the neighbouring items are listed and each is marked affected or clear.
4. Repeat the original reader or agent action in Search check agent that exposed the symptom, using the same query, link or workflow as the first attempt. Verify: the action completes and the original symptom does not appear.
5. Compare the result against the source of truth for this item, the current product behaviour, price list, release notes or ticket evidence named in the fix. Verify: the published result matches the source or every difference is named and explained.
6. Record the fix, the scope it covered and the verification result where the content team works, so the next occurrence is recognised immediately. Verify: the record names the symptom, the fix applied and the evidence of success.

Variant phrasings

Context overflow checking search results with full account history

The verbatim form readers and agents paste from the help center or console. Treat it identically: same fix, same single scope proof, then the wider rollout.

How to fix - context overflow when agent tried to check help center search results for an error query with full account history error context limit failure

The how to phrasing for the same problem in Search check agent. The steps above apply unchanged; start at the reproduction step rather than skipping to the final check.

Search check agent troubleshooting for this symptom

The symptom first phrasing used when the full message is hidden. Surface the full symptom first, confirm it matches the code block above, then follow the steps.

Why it happens

Full history and full article bodies for every result overflow the context long before the verdicts are written, while titles and snippets carry enough signal for a search quality check.

Edge cases

• The symptom appears in one locale, collection or audience view only. Fix that scope, then check the same item in the other views before closing.
• A cached or indexed copy keeps showing the old state after the fix. Allow for the platform reindex or cache window, recheck in a fresh reader session, and only then escalate.
• Two items have near identical titles. Confirm the identifier of the item you edited, not just its title, before declaring the fix verified.

Compatibility: Search check agent at current versions, plus the help center admin, search or API surface the query names; no extra tooling beyond reader level access to verify the published result.

Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pstA3P5TqkMiAaMusGt4vq7A

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pstA3P5TqkMiAaMusGt4vq7A

Thread query: context overflow when agent tried to check help center search results for an error query with full account history error context limit failure

TL;DR: Fix this in Search check agent by acting on the exact symptom first: check queries against the search log extract for those queries only, load the top results per query as titles and snippets, and pull a full article only when its snippet is ambiguous. Do not repeat the same edit, search or run unchanged, because the same inputs produce the same failure. Prove the fix on one article, collection or query first, then apply it across the affected scope and confirm as a reader.