What the documents look like
For product questions in After-sales repairs and reships, this page examines FastGPT document chunking. Preserve parent parts, parenthetical purposes and excluded accessories in replacement lists. The examples are hypothetical.
Constraints at the document chunking step
A proposed replacement list nests a trim piece for decoration only under an outer cover and lists a spring separately under a latch. A final note says the pictured complete cover exceeds what this list supplies. The question asks about a complete cover and spring. Parsing needs parent-child relationships, the local purpose and separate-provision state retained. A complete appearance cannot enlarge supply. If chunks keep only parent labels such as cover and latch, those group headings still establish no supplied assembly or confirmed set.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Material check | Conditions in this test | Implementation evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Parent-child hierarchy | Group labels and supplied children | Compare original tree item by item. |
| Parenthetical purpose | Trim decorative only | Retain local scope. |
| Accessory state | Spring separate | Retain latch-branch relationship. |
| Illustration scope | Complete cover exceeds list | Do not add contents. |
| Actual reference | Child and condition together | Inspect updated version. |
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, a tree parent may become an offered item; compare original hierarchy, parsed list and block identity for grouping labels. Second, spring separately supplied may detach from its latch; preserve part and state rather than using an isolated spring word as inclusion evidence. Third, the pictured assembly may fill missing composition; inspect the final note and illustration purpose instead of replacing the list with an image caption. These concern hierarchy, accessory state and display scope. Repeated assembly names in chunks establish no complete supplied product without the appropriate item-level source.
How to verify the setup
Ask about supplied children, spring status and the complete-cover note, retaining tree, parsed text, blocks and quotations. Repeat trim, spring and natural complete-set questions after edits for purpose and exclusion retention. Missing parent-child parsing needs structural repair; more indexes cannot create it. Updates need processing and actual-citation version checks. This exercise creates no replacement order and performs no physical assembly. It promises no real fit or dispatch, and absent complete-set confirmation remains unresolved rather than inferred from an illustration or several grouped part names.
| Material context | Scope |
|---|---|
| Document types | Repair Application, Reshipment Order, Inspection Report and Parts Outbound Order |
| Candidate sources | After-Sales System, Order System, Repair Service Point and Parts Warehouse WMS |
| Technical baseline | FastGPT v4.17.2 |