An Agentforce Specialist at a veterinary hospital group is documenting a custom topic for prescription refills so a colleague can maintain it. Which statement correctly separates the purpose of the topic's classification description from its scope?

The correct statement is the one saying the classification description tells the reasoning engine when to select the topic, while the scope states the boundary of what the topic is meant to accomplish. The classification description is matched against the user's utterance during topic selection, so it is the field that determines when this topic wins routing. Scope is a plain-language statement of the boundary of the topic's responsibility, which the reasoning engine uses to stay inside its lane once the topic is active and to recognise when a request has drifted outside it. The statement that says the classification description states what jobs the topic covers while the scope tells the engine which utterances to route to it is wrong because it swaps the two ideas: routing lives in the classification description, not in scope. The statement that ties the classification description to available actions and the scope to action order is wrong because actions are assigned to a topic as separate configuration, and their sequence is decided by the reasoning engine at run time based on the instructions and the inputs it still needs, not by a scope statement. The statement that says the classification description is shown to the pet owner while the scope is internal-only documentation is wrong because neither field is customer-facing text; what the owner sees is the generated response. Practical consequence: when refill requests keep landing in a general enquiries topic, the fix is almost always to sharpen the competing classification descriptions.