What this category's data looks like
The materials for enterprise independent skilled talent evaluation usually include three types: enterprise evaluation filing forms, evaluation specifications, and candidate rosters. The filing form records the evaluation entity, occupation name and level, filing date, and signature; the evaluation specification states the assessment method, scoring elements, and passing standards; the roster lists candidate names, identity information, declared level, and batch. When these three types of materials enter the authorized access and external service function, the filing form determines the basis for opening the external entry point and the authorization scope, the evaluation specification serves as the citation source to support external explanations, and the roster is used to determine whether the visitor's identity matches the visible scope. Materials are updated by batch, and common field characteristics are the coexistence of names, quantities, dates, signatures, and receipts, while version numbers and effective dates need to be synchronized. During external services, citation sources and traceability require that each citation can point back to the original paragraph, and unauthorized content must not be visible.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by the citation output of the knowledge base retrieval node, which outputs an array of citation content, each containing the original text fragment and source identifier, and the length can be 0. The externally available entry point and authorization scope are then completed by subsequent AI nodes, code nodes, or manual work.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Enterprise evaluation filing form | Check the filing form fields: whether the evaluation entity name, occupation name and level, filing date, signature, and receipt are complete, and whether they are consistent with the name, level, and date in the evaluation specification | Open the filing form and evaluation specification and compare field by field, record inconsistencies, and check whether signatures and receipts are missing |
| Evaluation specification | Check the evaluation specification fields: assessment method, scoring elements, passing standards, version number, and effective date, and whether they correspond to the declared level and batch date in the roster | Open the evaluation specification and roster and check the version number and date item by item, confirming that names and quantities match |
| Candidate roster | Check the roster fields: candidate names, identity information, declared level, and batch, and whether they are consistent with the names, quantities, and dates in the filing form and evaluation specification | Access once with a restricted identity, see whether the visible scope matches the setting, and confirm that unauthorized content is not visible |
| Citation content output | The number of returned items is consistent with the matched materials, and being empty is also normal; each citation can point back to the original paragraph | Open the citation marker in the conversation and compare it with the source document; run a test with a question that has no matching materials, and see whether the output is empty while the chain continues |
Three common errors
- Phenomenon: The name, quantity, or date of the same record does not match between the filing form and the roster. Cause: The two materials are updated separately, and field-level comparison and receipt verification were not performed.
- Phenomenon: The evaluation specification version is not synchronized, and the old scoring elements are still cited. Cause: The version number and effective date were not updated with the batch, and the citation source does not point back to the latest paragraph.
- Phenomenon: The filing form lacks a signature or receipt, but the external entry point is still open. Cause: The authorization scope determination only checks the name and not the signature and receipt, and the visitor's identity does not match the visible scope.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance of this function: ask a question with original text support, check whether the citation array and marker can point back to the original text, confirm that the citation fragment in responseData (non-streaming module results returned with detailed output enabled) corresponds to the source document, and that quoteList can be expanded to view the original text; then ask a question with no matching materials, and confirm that the array is empty while the chain runs through.
Business test: access once with a restricted identity, see whether the visible scope matches the setting, and unauthorized content is not visible; the number of citations is the array length, quoteMaxToken is the citation content budget, the two are not compared for equality, and the array item count is recorded separately.
- Open the search parameter panel and check item by item, confirm that the associated knowledge base is a knowledge base of the same vector model, and check the selected collection and vector model.
- Run a test with a question that has no matching materials, and see whether the output is empty while the chain continues; then open the citation marker and compare it with the source document to check that the citation corresponds to the original text.