What this category's data looks like
In the enrollment consultation conversion scenario for training institutions, business basis queries rely on three types of materials: enrollment brochures, consultation records, and trial class schedules. Enrollment brochures contain course names, number of class hours, start dates, refund terms, and institutional seals; consultation records contain key points of parents' inquiries, response wording, follow-up dates, and consultant signatures; trial class schedules contain trial time slots, teaching instructors, venue numbers, and parents' receipt signatures. These materials enter the dialogue and retrieval process in the form of scanned copies, tables, or text, and respectively serve the roles of external commitment wording, process communication records, and visit confirmation evidence. In terms of update cadence, enrollment brochures are revised by enrollment season, consultation records are appended with each communication, and trial class schedules are arranged weekly. In terms of field characteristics, the same course name, number of class hours, and start date may be written differently in the brochure and consultation records, version numbers and signed receipts are often missing, and each item must be traced back to the original text for verification.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by the server-side model channel configuration, outputting model binding relationships and channel responses. Basis items that can be traced back to the original text are completed by subsequent AI nodes, code nodes, or manual work. Models are divided into five categories: language, indexing, reranking, speech synthesis, and speech recognition, and different steps bind different model types.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Enrollment brochure | Course name, number of class hours, start date, refund terms, and institutional seal must be aligned item by item with the consultation records, and the version must be the current version | Extract the course fields and seal page from the brochure, compare them with how the same course is written and dated in the consultation records, and check whether the version number is the current version |
| Consultation records | Key points of parents' inquiries, response wording, follow-up dates, and consultant signatures must be complete, and the name, quantity, and date of the same record in the brochure and trial class schedule should be consistent | Search consultation records by course name, compare the number of class hours in the brochure with the time slots in the trial class schedule, and check whether signatures and receipts are complete |
| Trial class schedule | Trial time slots, teaching instructors, venue numbers, and parents' receipt signatures must match the appointment dates in the consultation records | Extract the time slot and instructor fields from the trial class schedule, compare them with the follow-up dates in the consultation records, and check whether the receipt signature exists |
| Model configuration | The language, indexing, and reranking models are respectively bound to the dialogue, retrieval, and reranking steps, and the model identifiers are consistent with the names returned by the channel | Check the type labels in the model configuration, compare them with the model names returned by the channel, and check the binding relationships of maxContext, maxTokens, quoteMaxToken, and toolChoice |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The number of class hours and start date for the same course do not match between the enrollment brochure and the consultation records. Cause: The two materials are entered separately, are not checked against the same field definitions, and their versions are not synchronized.
- Symptom: The trial class schedule lacks parents' receipt signatures, and the consultation records lack consultant signatures. Cause: Visit confirmation and communication records are not closed-loop, and the signature step is skipped.
- Symptom: Retrieval reports errors related to the indexing model, or the answer style changes abruptly after switching models. Cause: The indexing model is not bound to the retrieval step, and after changing the language model, the model identifier and channel response are not checked.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance for this feature: run one dialogue and one retrieval, check that the model identifiers in the responses are consistent with the names returned by the channel, and check the binding relationships of maxContext, maxTokens, quoteMaxToken, and toolChoice.
Business test: ask a basis question that spans materials, see whether the answer provides traceable sources, and check that the number of citations and the tokens of the cited text are recorded separately.
- In the model configuration, check the type labels and bound steps of the language, indexing, and reranking models, and compare them with the model names returned by the channel.
- Extract the course names, number of class hours, dates, and signature fields from the enrollment brochures, consultation records, and trial class schedules, trace each item back to the original text, and check whether the version is the current version.