Why does my priority list look different from a colleague's?
Priority tiers are calibrated to the knowledge level you set, not fixed by the content. The same concepts appear regardless; what changes is which ones the analysis judges as load-bearing for each reader.
The gap list is the same; the priorities are not
The same concepts appear at every level. The gap diagnosis is driven by your page content, not by the level you set. What differs is which concepts the pipeline judges as load-bearing for a reader at that level. A concept essential to a beginner may be only important to an expert on the same page, and the reverse also happens. Neither result is wrong.
A concrete example
Take a foundational concept like "RAG-based retrieval" on a page about content and AI retrieval. For a beginner, the pipeline tends to treat it as essential: the reader cannot follow the rest of the page without it. For an expert, the same concept is more often important rather than essential, because an expert reader is assumed to already hold it.
The judgment is about what each reader needs to have explained on the page. A foundational concept is a structural requirement for a beginner and assumed background for an expert. The concept is identified either way; only its tier moves.
How to compare results with a colleague
If you and a colleague analyzed the same URL at different levels, the priority distributions may not match. Check whether you both used the same level. If the levels differ intentionally, each priority list is correct for the reader it describes. If they differ by accident, re-run Phase 2 at the same level to get comparable results.
Re-running Phase 2 at a new level uses one analysis credit. Phase 1 does not need to re-run.