Public website copy and confidential case notes must both support agent retrieval. How should the vector database be organized?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
Public FAQs and sealed case files shouldn’t share the same open drawer. Separate vector collections—or equivalent tenancy isolation—keep confidential case notes away from public website retrieval.
Full Explanation
Public website copy and confidential case notes must not share an unrestricted retrieval surface. Organize the vector database with separate collections or tenancy isolation so public content and confidential case knowledge are queried under different access controls. Isolation is the primary pattern for respecting sensitivity boundaries in municipal RAG.
Merging all notes and website text into one unrestricted collection for convenience invites cross-leakage into resident-facing answers. Publishing confidential case notes to the open-data portal for easier embedding is a privacy incident, not an architecture. Storing only public content and discarding case notes permanently may protect privacy but removes capabilities staff agents need when authorized.
Exam caveat: separate collections still require identity, authZ, and query routing—isolation alone is incomplete without access policy. Operational check: attempt a public-role query and confirm confidential case chunks never appear; attempt a privileged clerk role and confirm case collections are reachable only with that role’s credentials. Encrypt confidential collections at rest and deny public service accounts from those indexes in IAM policy.