A translated bug report can read smoothly while describing a different failure. Changing “must not appear” to “must appear,” localizing an error string, or rearranging a repeated click can send a developer down the wrong reproduction path. AI bug report translation in Jira should preserve the evidence needed to investigate the original report, not improve it into a new specification.
Use Rovo to propose a translation of an existing description, then have an authorized bilingual reviewer compare it with a separately retained original. The procedure below is educational. Its Spanish report and English candidate are fictional and unexecuted; neither is actual customer data or an observed Rovo response.
Atlassian documents content translation among Jira’s AI features. Its Jira Cloud writing guide describes selecting existing description or comment text in edit mode, opening the Rovo button, entering a prompt or choosing an offered option, and pressing Enter. Generated content streams into the editor and can be edited directly or removed with Undo.
This is native Jira Cloud writing assistance. A Marketplace translation app, browser page translation, and Jira interface-language settings are different mechanisms. Changing an interface language does not establish that a bug description has been faithfully translated. Do not borrow an app’s language menu or automatic bilingual storage behavior for the native Rovo editor.
Before working with a real issue, confirm that the intended user can edit its description, Rovo is available for that app, the required source and target languages work in the actual editor, and the content is approved for AI processing. Atlassian documents Rovo availability on Standard, Premium, and Enterprise plans, with organization-level access controls. Government Cloud and sandbox availability have separate limitations. A plan name alone does not verify your user’s editor, configuration, or language options.
Do not assume every editor provides an isolated preview and a separate Save button. Atlassian’s work-item-details guide says basic field edits can save when you click or tap away, and warns that a changing work-item experience may not be enabled on every site. Check the actual description editor’s draft, cancel, apply, and persistence behavior before starting.
The writing guide also documents a review preference: open the bottom-right Rovo button, select Auto, then turn off Auto-apply AI writing changes. Use that control where it is available and verify its behavior. Applying AI output to editor text and persisting an issue description are separate boundaries; turning off auto-apply does not establish a universal unsaved-draft guarantee.
Proceed only through an authorized draft route that demonstrably allows bilingual review before the live description changes. If selecting text, generating output, or leaving the field could persist an unreviewed replacement, stop and arrange an approved non-live drafting route. Do not use the live bug as a place to discover how saving works.
Keep a source-exact snapshot separate from the content that Rovo may transform. Use an organization-approved location with the same authorized audience, or a more restricted audience where required. Record the issue reference, original revision, source language, and a source anchor that lets the reviewer identify the exact text. Reopen the snapshot and compare its complete content with the description before any generation.
An “Original” heading inside a field does not protect the text underneath it from a whole-field rewrite. Nor does telling Rovo to keep the original make that text immutable. Undo is useful for editor changes, but it is not your durable source copy. Do not depend on an undo stack or saved history instead of a verified snapshot you can retrieve independently.
Preserve code, logs, quoted interface text, request paths, configuration values, build identifiers, and issue keys exactly. Keep the preconditions, ordered steps, actual result, expected result, and unresolved questions together. Otherwise, a later reviewer may compare the translation with a fragment that omits the condition responsible for the failure.
Permission to read a Jira issue is not approval to send its content to an AI feature or disclose a translated copy to another team. Confirm the organization’s AI-processing rules and the reviewer’s effective audience before submission. Check the applicable Rovo data-handling documentation rather than inferring retention, residency, or confidentiality from the product name or issue visibility.
Minimize sensitive information in the working copy. If approved redactions are necessary, keep the restricted exact original unchanged and record the redactions separately. A redacted input is a derivative, not a byte-identical original. Do not silently replace the source snapshot with the sanitized version and later claim the original was preserved.
Within the approved draft route, select the working text rather than assuming a heading defines the transformation scope. Where the documented editor route is available, enter edit mode, highlight that text, select the Rovo button above it, and enter the translation instruction. Confirm the selected scope and review controls before pressing Enter. Do not assume there is a dedicated Translate button or a particular language picker in every tenant.
A future instruction can constrain the draft without authorizing a save. The following template has not been run:
Translate this existing Spanish bug description into English. Translate human explanations only. Preserve issue identifiers, build and browser versions, configuration values, code, log messages, request paths, error codes, and quoted UI strings exactly. Preserve every precondition and numbered action in its original order, including repeated-action limits, numbers, units, negations, and required outcomes. Keep actual and expected results distinct. Do not infer a cause, severity, priority, assignee, missing step, or new requirement. Keep uncertainties unresolved and list wording that needs bilingual clarification. Return a draft for review, not an approved replacement.
Treat those instructions as requests, not enforcement. After generation, compare the entire output against the snapshot. If the transformation replaced the working text, retrieve the original from that verified snapshot; do not ask the model to reconstruct it from memory. An incomplete draft should remain incomplete until the author or reviewer supplies the missing information.
The bounded packet below is revision ES-v1 for fictional issue DEMO-318. Both versions are author-written, not observed Rovo output. Human bilingual approval is Pending; save readiness is Blocked. No Jira/Rovo action was performed. The apparent failure, environment, and expected behavior are teaching inputs, not reproduced observations or approved product requirements.
Contexto: DEMO-318, revisión ES-v1, idioma español. Entorno ficticio de ensayo: compilación 7.4.2-rc1, Firefox 144, export.mode=summary. Precondición: la sesión ya está iniciada y hay exactamente 2 filas seleccionadas.
Paso 1: abrir el panel «Informes».
Paso 2: seleccionar «Exportar» una sola vez.
Paso 3: esperar 5 s sin volver a seleccionar «Exportar».
Resultado real: aparece «No se pudo exportar», el registro contiene ERR-EXPORT-409 y la solicitud a /api/export?mode=summary devuelve 409; no se descarga ningún archivo.
Resultado esperado: debe descargarse un archivo CSV con las 2 filas seleccionadas y no debe aparecer «No se pudo exportar».
Se desconoce si el problema ocurre en otros navegadores o compilaciones; la causa y la frecuencia no están confirmadas.
Context: DEMO-318, revision ES-v1, source language Spanish. Fictional staging environment: build 7.4.2-rc1, Firefox 144, export.mode=summary. Precondition: the session is already signed in and exactly 2 rows are selected.
Step 1: open the panel labeled «Informes».
Step 2: select «Exportar» exactly once.
Step 3: wait 5 s without selecting «Exportar» again.
Actual result: «No se pudo exportar» appears, the log contains ERR-EXPORT-409, and the request to /api/export?mode=summary returns 409; no file is downloaded.
Expected result: a CSV file containing the 2 selected rows must be downloaded and «No se pudo exportar» must not appear.
It is unknown whether the problem occurs in other browsers or builds; the cause and frequency are not confirmed.
The quoted Spanish labels remain unchanged because they identify what someone would see in this fictional interface. A separate explanation may describe their meaning, but replacing the literal error with an English equivalent would weaken the reproducer. The same applies to the request path and log code: explain them separately, never “correct” or localize their values.
Review Scope | Source Anchor | Required Comparison | Actual Review State |
|---|---|---|---|
Context and preconditions | ES-v1 context | Same build, browser, configuration, signed-in session, and exactly 2 selected rows | Human review Pending |
Ordered actions | ES-v1 steps 1 to 3 | Open «Informes»; select «Exportar» once; wait 5 s without selecting it again | Human review Pending |
Machine and UI literals | ES-v1 actual result | Preserve ERR-EXPORT-409, /api/export?mode=summary, 409, and «No se pudo exportar» exactly | Human review Pending |
Actual outcome | ES-v1 actual result | Error appears, log and request details remain, and no file downloads | Human review Pending |
Expected outcome | ES-v1 expected result | CSV contains the 2 selected rows AND the quoted error must not appear | Human review Pending |
Unknowns | ES-v1 closing paragraph | Other browsers and builds, cause, and frequency stay unconfirmed | Human review Pending |
This table is a review worksheet, not a translation-quality score or a Pass/Fail test result. It does not prove that Rovo preserved any text, that a tester reproduced the bug, or that a bilingual person approved the candidate. No authorized human reviewer has been identified for this illustration.
Give an authorized bilingual reviewer the exact original revision, the complete candidate, and the literal inventory. Include DEMO-318, ES-v1, 7.4.2-rc1, Firefox 144, export.mode=summary, the quoted UI strings, ERR-EXPORT-409, /api/export?mode=summary, 409, CSV, the selected-row count, and the wait duration. A literal match is necessary but insufficient: the surrounding statement can still reverse what the literal means.
Read each source clause against its translation before checking grammar. In the example, “una sola vez” limits the action to one selection; the next step forbids selecting it again during the wait. Reordering those instructions or dropping that prohibition changes the reproduction conditions. Confirm the existing signed-in session and the exact selected-row count rather than replacing them with a new login or an unspecified selection.
Check both halves of the expected result. Downloading a CSV is insufficient if its required rows disappear, and a successful download does not satisfy the separate requirement that the quoted error must not appear. Conversely, the actual-result paragraph must retain the error display, log code, request response, and absence of a downloaded file. Do not merge these outcomes into “export fails” or promote the expected result into a report of what happened.
Review environment terminology as carefully as error text. The candidate’s word “staging” must be checked against the source’s “entorno de ensayo”; it is not evidence of a confirmed deployment tier. Ask the author or bilingual reviewer if the intended environment cannot be established. Preserve the frozen wording and record any approved clarification as a new revision rather than quietly rewriting the source.
Keep unknowns visible. This report does not establish another affected browser, a different build, a cause, or a frequency. A plausible technical explanation is still an added claim. If an expression is ambiguous, record the question and hold the draft instead of asking AI to choose the most likely meaning. Without the authorized reviewer and approval, the translation remains Pending and saving remains Blocked.
Before permitting persistence, record the reviewer’s actual identity, the reviewed original revision, the decision, and any accepted clarifications. Confirm that the destination audience is authorized for both language versions. These are workflow records your team must establish, not claims that Jira supplies dedicated bilingual approval fields automatically.
Assemble the approved description using the verified original snapshot and the reviewed translation. If both versions belong in the description, compare the full original section with the snapshot again after assembling them. Keep the source language and revision distinguishable from the translated draft and its approval. Do not assume the original survived because an Original heading is still present.
Only then use the actual editor’s verified persistence mechanism. That may involve an explicit confirmation or saving when focus leaves the field; follow the behavior checked earlier rather than inventing a universal Save step. Reopen the work item and compare both complete versions, literal values, step order, and source references. Leave unrelated priority, severity, assignment, and workflow status unchanged.
When the safe draft boundary, source copy, or human fidelity review is missing, retain the draft without replacing the live report. A useful translation lets the next reader investigate the same evidence in another language while still being able to inspect exactly what the reporter originally wrote.
Two reports can describe the same symptom while disagreeing about where the failure occurs. If a reviewer accepts a duplicate suggestion because the titles…
A checkout test times out while waiting for an order confirmation. The runner reports an assertion failure, the application records a failed request, and…
A recipient-preview rule changes, but the regression suite still checks the earlier behavior. An AI agent may choose a different route through the editor…
Create traceable test cases, prepare release-specific test runs, and keep approved coverage current as the product changes.
