Failure store clarifications

[gmarouli]

Summary

It has come to our attention that it was not clear to our users that the failure store does not store security errors and that the reroute processor can change the target failure store too.

Generative AI disclosure

1. Did you use a generative AI (GenAI) tool to assist in creating this contribution?

• Yes
• No

[github-actions]

Elastic Docs AI PR menu

Check the box to run an AI review for this pull request.

• Review docs changes (docs-review). Status: queued.

Powered by GitHub Agentic Workflows and docs-actions. For more information, reach out to the docs team.

[github-actions]

🔍 Preview links for changed docs

• manage-data/data-store/data-streams/failure-store.md

[github-actions]

✅ Elastic Docs Style Checker (Vale)

No issues found on modified lines!

---

The Vale linter checks documentation changes against the Elastic Docs style guide. To use Vale locally or report issues, refer to Elastic style guide for Vale.

[github-actions]

Docs review summary

Focus areas

• Style and clarity: One issue in the new sentence — comma splice, "Note that" filler, and future tense instead of present tense. The important admonition update (adding "security issues") is clear and accurate.
• Jargon: No new unexplained jargon introduced.
• Frontmatter and applies_to: Frontmatter is intact; Vale flagged mapped_pages as a pre-existing warning (not changed by this PR).
• Content type fit: How-to page structure unchanged; the two added lines fit naturally into the existing intro section.
• Parent issue satisfaction: Satisfied. The PR adds the reroute processor caveat and the security-issues exclusion, which directly address the two gaps called out in the PR description.

Generated by Docs review agent for issue #7378 · 24.9 AIC · ⌖ 4.66 AIC · ⊞ 10.7K

[ankikuma]

Thanks Mary!