What this category's data looks like
Enterprise independent skilled talent evaluation involves three core types of materials: the enterprise evaluation filing form, the evaluation specification, and the candidate roster. The filing form is submitted by the enterprise to the human resources and social security department, contains the evaluation occupation, level, filing number, date, and handler's signature, and is the source credential for the legality of the evaluation; the evaluation specification stipulates the assessment method, scoring criteria, and passing line, and the version number and effective date are key fields for version synchronization; the candidate roster records names, ID numbers, declared occupation levels, batches, and the unit's stamped receipt, and the quantity and dates must be aligned item by item with the filing form and evaluation specification. When the materials enter the knowledge base retrieval node, the filing form and evaluation specification serve as cited sources to provide institutional basis, and the roster serves as the list source to provide personnel details; together the three support the traceability needs in deployment, operations, and application handover. In terms of update rhythm, the filing form is re-signed when the filing changes, the evaluation specification is re-versioned when the standard is revised, and the roster is generated by batch; after any material is re-versioned, the old citations need to be re-associated.
Configuration and implementation checks
This link is executed by the citation output of the knowledge base retrieval node, which outputs an array of cited content, each item containing the original text fragment and source identifier, and the length may be 0. "Handover-ready deployment status and operation records" are completed subsequently by AI nodes, code nodes, or manual work.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Enterprise evaluation filing form | The four items of filing number, evaluation occupation level, filing date, and handler's signature must be consistent with the cover of the evaluation specification and the first page of the roster, and the signature field must not be blank | Retrieve the original filing form, compare the number, occupation name, level, and date item by item, and check whether the handler's signature and receipt are complete |
| Evaluation specification | The version number and effective date must be consistent with the version cited in the filing form, and the passing line and assessment method in the scoring criteria must correspond to the roster batch | In the node, check the selected knowledge base collections and their vector models, open the search parameter panel, and verify the values item by item |
| Candidate roster | Names, ID numbers, declared occupation levels, batch quantity, and the unit's stamped receipt must be consistent with the filing form list, and the date must not be earlier than the filing date | Run a test with a question that has no matching materials, and see whether the output is empty while the chain continues; then check whether the roster quantity is consistent with the filing form quantity |
| Cited 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 markers in the conversation and compare them with the source documents; record the array length and the quoteMaxToken budget, and do not compare the two for equality |
Three common errors
- Phenomenon: The same candidate's name is written differently in the roster and the filing form, and the quantity or date does not match. Cause: The two materials were entered separately without field-level comparison, and during handover only the total number was checked, not the details.
- Phenomenon: The evaluation specification has been re-versioned, but the knowledge base still cites the old version's provisions, and the version number on the handover form is inconsistent with the version hit by retrieval. Cause: After re-versioning, the associated knowledge base was not updated synchronously, and the old citations were not re-associated.
- Phenomenon: The filing form lacks the handler's signature or the roster lacks the unit receipt, making it impossible to confirm material completeness during handover. Cause: The signature and receipt steps were not checked item by item before scanning and uploading, and the handover form did not list the signature field.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance for this function: ask a question with an original-text basis, and check whether the citation array and markers can point back to the original text; then ask a question with no matching materials, and confirm that the array is empty while the chain runs through. You can use responseData (non-streaming module results returned with detailed output enabled) and quoteList to view the return structure; the number of citations is the array length, and quoteMaxToken is the citation content budget; the two are not compared for equality.
Business test: check item by item once according to the handover form, and see which item is missing from the record.
- Retrieve the three materials: the filing form, evaluation specification, and roster; compare names, quantities, dates, and signatures item by item, and record inconsistencies in the handover form for supplementation.
- In the node, check the selected knowledge base collections and their vector models, open the search parameter panel, verify the values item by item, and confirm version synchronization before handing over to the next shift.