What the Data for This Category Looks Like
Credit application risk control data primarily comes from electronic materials submitted by applicants, structured data pushed by partner credit reporting agencies, and physical documents scanned and uploaded offline. Data synchronization occurs once per application cycle, with no real-time update mechanism. There are two types of document structures:
- Standardized credit application form fields, including fields with clear units such as applicant identity identification, application amount, and years in operation.
- Unstructured supporting materials, such as bank statement PDFs and scanned enterprise credit reports.
Fields must strictly match the identity and qualification requirements of the applying entity, and some fields have fixed format validation rules.
What Constraints Do These Characteristics Impose on Multi-turn Dialogue and Prompt Engineering?
Mixed structured and unstructured data requires multi-turn dialogue to first complete structured field completion before initiating unstructured material parsing, to avoid interaction confusion. The one-time data nature of a single application requires that dialogue context is strictly bound to the unique application ID, to prevent context interference between different applications. Fixed format validation rules for fields require prompts to clearly specify format requirements for output fields, reducing format errors in subsequent reviews. One-time submitted materials do not need repeated requests; prompts must clearly list the required material list during the first interaction to reduce the number of multi-turn interactions. Additionally, since data is only valid during the application cycle, all interactions must be completed before the application is closed, to avoid information loss caused by expired context.
How to Configure the Settings
| Configuration Item | Recommended Setting | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
maxContext | First 20 dialogue contexts | Credit application interactions mainly focus on material completion and review confirmation. Excessive historical context will interfere with field validation for the current application. Retaining the most recent 20 contexts covers the key information of the completion process |
system_prompt | Fixed prefix including "bind application ID", "complete structured fields first before parsing materials", "output fields in specified format", followed by credit review-specific rules | Clarify the binding logic and task priority of the dialogue, avoid context confusion, and ensure output meets the field requirements of risk control review |
file_parse_chunk_size | 800–1200 characters | Materials such as bank statements and credit reports have long text lengths. This segment length balances parsing accuracy and call costs, avoiding model context overflow caused by overly long single segments |
max_tokens | 4000–6000 tokens | Credit application review results need to include multi-field validation and material analysis. This range covers complete review output content, avoiding result truncation |
conversation_persistence | Persist by application ID | Ensure isolation of dialogue records between different applicants, prevent other users from viewing others' dialogue content, and bind the application ID to avoid context interference |
The parameter values provided on this page are common recommended starting points for configuration. Actual values are affected by material form, data volume, and business rules. Specific issues require specific analysis, and it is recommended to test on your own samples before finalizing settings.
Three Common Misconfigurations
- Phenomenon: The model outputs credit application fields with inconsistent formatting, with some fields missing units or containing format errors. Cause: The prompt does not clearly specify format requirements for fields, and does not integrate field validation rules into the system prompt.
- Phenomenon: Unable to accurately obtain the dialogue record ID for the current application, resulting in failure to associate subsequent review processes. Cause: The
conversation_bind_idparameter is not configured, or the unique application identifier is not passed as a dialogue binding parameter during interface calls, corresponding to a common community issue regarding dialogue record ID acquisition. - Phenomenon: The system prompt is called without loading the current application's context in order, so the model cannot obtain the latest material parsing results. Cause: The dialogue context loading logic is not correctly configured, or the current application's context ID is not bound before each dialogue call, resulting in the prompt call prioritizing loading old historical dialogues, corresponding to a community-concerned issue regarding prompt call order.
How to Verify Correct Configuration
- Use the platform version V4.9.13 or higher, submit a test application, and check the context loading status in the dialogue history to confirm that only interaction records for the current application are loaded, with no content from other applications.
- Input a credit application field that does not meet the format requirements (such as a 19-digit ID number), and confirm that the model will prompt a format error and request correction.
- Upload test unstructured materials, and confirm that the model will parse the text according to the specified segment length and output structured fields that meet the requirements.
- Call the dialogue record list interface, pass the offset parameter, and confirm that the dialogue history for the current application can be correctly retrieved in pages, in line with the interface documentation's definition of the offset parameter.
Question material comes from public community discussions. Configuration values are common starting points and should be measured against your own samples. Verified on 2026-09-14.