A framework for deciding which Knowledge source fits which kind of information.
| Source | Best for | Stays in sync? |
|---|---|---|
| Google Drive | Living documents your team edits regularly | Yes, automatically |
| Direct upload | Finished, static references (a signed contract, a completed report) | No — re-upload if it changes |
| Session artifact promotion | Something your team already produced inside Orvoq | Depends — promoted copies don't auto-update |
| Paste text or a link | A fact, policy, or webpage that isn't a file anywhere | Link fetches once; text is static |
Does this information change, and do you want Knowledge to reflect that automatically? If yes, Google Drive is almost always the right call — anything else means remembering to manually update Knowledge every time the source changes, which realistically won't happen consistently.
Uploads are the easiest option, which makes them the most overused. A document that changes even occasionally is better connected via Drive than uploaded once and quietly going stale. Reserve direct upload for things that are genuinely finished.
Not everything worth knowing exists as a file. A policy someone just knows, a clarification from a meeting, a public webpage you want cited — these have no natural home as an upload. Paste them in directly rather than creating an artificial document just to have something to upload.
When an agent or a person produces something useful inside a session — a comparison table, a summary — promoting it to Knowledge keeps the connection to where it came from, visible in its source citation. This is different from uploading, since the link back to the originating session stays intact.
For the bigger picture on maintaining a Knowledge base once it's populated, see Designing a Knowledge base your team will actually use.