What the documents look like
For product questions in Franchisee onboarding, this page examines FastGPT document chunking. Separate demonstration actions, product attributes and sidebar notes in coaching-equipment text. The examples are hypothetical.
Constraints at the document chunking step
A proposed opening-coaching equipment page has a removable tabletop on a nonfolding base, a demonstration moving props off the table before storage and a sidebar naming a pictured folding stand as another design. The question asks whether the current table folds. Parsing needs component attributes and the sidebar identity preserved. Moving props is an action, not a structural capability. A chunk joining removable and folding stand could invent folding for this table, while the demonstration supplies no missing construction detail or physical operation beyond its stated prop movement.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Material check | Conditions in this test | Implementation evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Component attributes | Removable top, nonfolding base | Inspect subject and negation. |
| Sidebar identity | Other folding design | Do not merge with current product. |
| Demonstration object | Props are moved | Do not expand to table disassembly. |
| Chunk reference | Every excerpt traces to product | Retain source correspondence. |
| Actual capability | No physical operation | Do not promise folding. |
Documented conditions
| Documented item / implementation check | Condition |
|---|---|
Original-document check | Compare original files with parsed output. |
Chunk completeness | Keep conditions traceable to their subjects. |
Data and indexes | Retain original-data and index evidence separately. |
Sample retrieval | Retest literal wording and natural questions. |
Post-update check | Inspect training or index state after updates. |
Three common errors
First, the base’s nonfolding condition may detach from the table; inspect sentence subjects and parsed negation. Second, another-design sidebar may merge into main text; compare layout relationship, product identity and chunk source instead of overriding the current design through a caption. Third, moving props may summarize into table-disassembly steps; inspect the verb’s object without expanding teaching demonstration into construction instructions. These concern negation, sidebar attribution and action object. Adjacent paragraphs establish no single product capability when their original subjects and material roles remain different.
How to verify the setup
Ask separately about tabletop, base and props, then identify the sidebar design, retaining the original-to-citation mapping. After chunk changes, repeat removable, folding and natural storage questions against actual returns without promising exact matching. Lost negation needs original-structure investigation before indexing. Updated design notes require processing and index-state checks rather than upload presence. This exercise performs no physical assembly or teaching trial and guarantees no real storage procedure. Actual product capability and safe operation need their own applicable evidence beyond the proposed text structure and the answer it supports.
| Material context | Scope |
|---|---|
| Document types | Training Attendance Sheet, Opening Checklist, SOP Manual and Assessment Scores |
| Candidate sources | Training System, Supervisor APP, Store Photos and Headquarters SOP Library |
| Technical baseline | FastGPT v4.17.2 |