“Where do users abandon after adding an item?”
Review the last completed action, visible errors, loops, and missing feedback before abandonment.
Monolytics Assistant AI-assisted session replay analysis
Surface relevant sessions for bugs, UX friction, and conversion-blocker investigations. Then inspect representative replays before prioritizing a fix.

Product walkthrough
Monolytics Assistant narrows a broad replay archive into a focused investigation path. The result is not a verdict: it is a set of relevant sessions and observable patterns for your team to review.
Example input
“Show sessions where users abandoned checkout after adding items to cart.”
Review output
A relevant session set, repeated behavior candidates, and recordings to open before deciding whether the issue is product friction, instrumentation, or an outlier.

Supported investigations
Focused questions tied to a page, event, journey, or outcome produce a review path your team can validate. Questions about exact motive should become targeted follow-up research instead.
Review the last completed action, visible errors, loops, and missing feedback before abandonment.
Compare representative failed and successful sessions from the same activation path.
Look for repeated observable symptoms, then open the replay around the affected control.
Inspect navigation, field interaction, error states, and successful comparison sessions without guessing motive.
Evidence-first workflow
Name the flow, outcome, segment, page, or event that makes a session relevant.
Use natural-language search to narrow the replay set around the behavior you want to investigate.
Open representative recordings, confirm the visible symptom, and compare failed and successful paths.
Fix, add instrumentation, ask a targeted question, or keep monitoring when evidence is still incomplete.
Verification and limits
Replay evidence is strong at showing visible behavior and context. It is weaker at explaining motive, proving causality, or predicting the business impact of a change.

Privacy and scope
Public review method
These public guides define the review standard behind the Assistant content: observable evidence first, representative sessions next, and a human decision at the end.
Move from a product question to relevant sessions, repeated behavior, verification, and the next action.
Read the workflow →Separate an investigation lead from a repeated pattern or a supported finding before prioritization.
Review the matrix →Verify scope, representative sessions, competing explanations, and supporting signals before acting.
Use the checklist →Start free, ask about a specific flow, and verify the representative sessions before your team changes the product.
From the Monolytics blog
Use these breakdowns when you need to review AI-surfaced issue candidates, rage clicks, ignored CTAs, or form drop-off before the issue becomes a support thread.
How to use AI-assisted replay analysis to surface likely issue patterns, verify representative sessions, and choose the next action.
Read on the blog →A practical gate for checking AI-surfaced replay findings before filing a bug, shipping a UX fix, or launching a survey.
Read on the blog →How to turn assistant-surfaced bug candidates into clearer triage notes with visible symptoms and representative sessions.
Read on the blog →A workflow for validating UX issue candidates with successful-session comparison and supporting signals.
Read on the blog →How to classify assistant-surfaced bug and UX candidates before deciding whether to fix, survey, instrument, or monitor.
Read on the blog →