On September 28, automated editorial jobs stopped because they couldn’t verify the current source material they needed to prepare content. Radek then provided a specific source that opened in his browser. With its existence established, the next step was to check whether the automation could access it.
The stop was justified. The diagnosis needed another check.
These jobs required verified, current source material before they could proceed. Pausing was the right response: the agent wasn’t supposed to fill in the gaps or rely on information it already had.
Calling the material “missing,” though, went beyond what the failed search established. The job had been unable to retrieve the content it needed. That still left several questions open: had the source been created, where was it stored, and could the automation read it?
Those questions matter to the person trying to get the work moving again. If the input was never created, someone needs to supply it. If it already exists, the next step is to check how the job can reach it. Asking a colleague to write a new brief at that point could create unnecessary work.
One source, two different results
The specific source Radek provided made a direct comparison possible. It opened in the browser where he was signed in. The connector—the connection the automation used to retrieve the source—couldn’t read it.
That established a difference in access to the same content. It didn’t reveal the exact technical cause, and the retrieval error alone didn’t identify a setting to fix. But it did give the investigation a clear next step: test the job’s access to the known source. Opening the page again in Radek’s browser wouldn’t answer that question.
Before asking someone to recreate the input
If a job stops in a similar way, first ask the person responsible for the source to identify the exact material the job was meant to use. If that person can open it, ask whoever manages the automation to try reading the same source through the connection the job uses. This checks whether it is available to the job as well.
What you verify determines what to do next:
| What you’ve verified | What to do next |
|---|---|
| The source was never created, or the person responsible confirms that it is missing. | Arrange with that person to supply the information the job needs. |
| The owner can open the exact source, but the job can’t read it. | Have the people responsible for the automation and access check the job’s access to that source. Any alternative way of providing it must be authorized. |
| The job can read the source, but it is an older version that doesn’t meet this task’s requirements. | Work with the source owner to find and verify the correct current version. |
A search that returns no results doesn’t establish the first case. Until you have either a specific source or confirmation that it is missing, the cause remains unresolved.
The September 28 incident matched the second row. The older-version example is general guidance; outdated material was not established as the cause of this stop. It still matters as a separate check: a job needs both readable material and a version it is allowed to use for the work at hand.
Work resumed. Access for the next unattended run was still unverified.
Before work resumed, the specific current sources were verified under supervision. That included checking their content and whether they were the required versions. A page title or confirmation that a source existed would not have been enough. Content preparation resumed only after those checks.
That allowed this run to continue. At that point, it was still unverified whether the connector would be able to retrieve the material on its own next time. The original requirement therefore still applied to future unattended runs: if the required current source could not be verified, the work would stop.
When a job reports a missing source, ask: Have we confirmed that the source is missing, or is this job unable to read it? The answer tells you whether someone needs to supply the input or investigate access to material that already exists.