When important new articles never reach the sitemap, another broad rewrite or another batch of output may leave the underlying problem intact. Diagnose the relevant failure before changing the whole process.
Find the likely cause
The publishing workflow does not update the generator.
Treat this as an explanation to verify against the actual work. Look at the input, the relevant decision, and the final result together. If the evidence does not support this diagnosis, investigate the mismatch before applying a convenient but unrelated fix.
Make the targeted correction
Include the correct content type and refresh the sitemap after publication.
A sitemap is most useful when it accurately lists the site's intended discoverable canonical pages.
Check that the repair worked
Compare newly published canonical URLs with the generated file.
Repeat the check on the final version that the reader or customer will encounter. An approved draft, a preview, and a published result can differ; the acceptance decision should concern the version people actually use.
Prevent the next related failure
A separate issue to watch for is this: sitemap URLs conflict with canonical destinations. Use the intended canonical format consistently.
Monitor the useful outcome
Track invalid entries, missing intended pages, and consistency between sitemap URLs and site behavior.
Keep a short record of the original symptom, the evidence behind the diagnosis, and the result of the acceptance check. That record makes the solution reusable when the same condition appears again, without assuming that every superficially similar problem has the same cause.
Official reference for the platform or standard discussed: Google Search Central: sitemaps.