What data for this category looks like
Data for this category comes from enterprise contract management systems, compliance risk databases, legal and regulatory repositories, case management systems, and reporting platforms. Update frequency is once per month. Daily documents include compliance risk lists, contract legal review opinions, major issue legal opinions, compliance review forms, and violation report investigation results. Most documents combine structured tables and unstructured text. Fields cover risk level, review subject, issue type, processing progress, and other items. No unified fixed format exists, and content adjusts according to internal enterprise management specifications.
What constraints these characteristics impose on the multi-turn dialogue and prompts link
Dispersed data sources, mostly internal systems, require that user consultation content and system-retrieved results are passed in rounds via the messages parameter. This process gradually guides users to provide document identifiers or permission scopes for corresponding systems, avoiding unauthorized access. The monthly update feature requires prompts to clearly mark the latest update node of data, preventing reference to expired compliance clauses or risk lists. A high proportion of unstructured documents requires multi-turn dialogue to decompose document content through progressive questioning and extract key fields. No unified format exists for fields, so prompts must adapt to multiple document structures and flexibly match extraction logic for different fields.
Reference only; verify against the target FastGPT release and deployment documentation.
How to set configurations
| Configuration Item | Recommended Setting | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Chunk Length | 800–1200 characters | Fits the paragraph length of compliance-related documents, avoids splitting and damaging the integrity of legal clauses |
| Overlap Length | 100–200 characters | Retains legally related content across chunks, prevents key compliance clauses from being split |
| Single Search Limit | Top 5 results | Aligns with scenarios where compliance reviews need to focus on core risks, avoids interference from redundant information |
chatId | Automatically generated per conversation session | Used to associate the context of multi-turn dialogue, ensuring that compliance review historical records are traceable |
| Maximum Context | 4000 tokens | Adapts to compliance review history and document fragments that need to be recalled during multi-turn dialogue |
variables | Calibrated based on actual testing | Used to pass permission parameters of enterprise compliance systems, adapting to access scopes of different subjects |
Three common mistakes
- Phenomenon: Knowledge base retrieval returns empty results during dialogue, but matches content when tested separately in the knowledge base. Cause: The permission scope of the compliance system carried by the
variablesparameter is not correctly passed during multi-turn dialogue, resulting in restricted retrieval scope. - Phenomenon: Uploaded compliance-related documents cannot be read during dialogue after local deployment. Cause: The parsing plugin for the corresponding document format is not configured, or the uploaded file size exceeds the system preset threshold.
- Phenomenon: Expired legal references appear in compliance review opinions generated during multi-turn dialogue. Cause: The prompt does not explicitly require retrieval of the latest monthly updated compliance database, resulting in the use of expired data.
How to confirm configurations are complete
- Trigger a compliance risk retrieval manually, verify whether returned results include current monthly updated compliance document content.
- Enable multi-turn dialogue testing, upload a contract review opinion document, confirm that the system can gradually extract fields including risk level and review subject.
- Call the
variablesparameter to pass test permissions, verify whether retrieval results of different permission subjects match preset scopes. - View dialogue logs, confirm that context fragments of each retrieval are not excessively truncated, and complete legal clause content is retained.
The values provided are common starting points and should be measured against the reader's own samples.
Question material comes from public community discussions. Configuration values are common starting points and should be measured against your own samples. Verified on 2026-09-28.