What the documents look like
Fresh fruit procurement at store level draws on wholesale market quotations and supplier offers. The working documents are purchase orders, acceptance sheets, pesticide-residue test reports, and loss records, updated daily or per batch. Product-profile and selection questions must turn the names, grades, origins, batches, and acceptance states recorded in these documents into retrievable entries, so that buyers and store fresh-department supervisors can use them during price comparison, grade acceptance, and loss control. The subject, object, validity window, and status fields carried in the documents decide whether a retrieval result can support a selection judgement.
Two features of this category shape the task. First, the material is batch-scoped and dated: a quotation carries a validity period, an acceptance sheet records a delivered quantity on a given day, and a test report may still be pending. Second, the same product name appears across several documents with different roles, so a question about selection has to be answered against the document that actually states the field in question.
Constraints at the model connections step
Model connections and configuration determine whether product-profile and selection questions can answer from document content. A language model handles text dialogue, and an index model indexes text chunks for relevant text retrieval; the system needs at least one language model and one index model to operate. AI Proxy is a required dependency from V4.17.0. Both the app and the admin service must set AIPROXY_API_ENDPOINT and a non-empty AIPROXY_API_TOKEN; missing either causes startup validation to fail. Legacy OpenAI environment variables or a single-model custom request address cannot substitute for these two settings. AIPROXY_API_ENDPOINT takes the service root address without appending /v1. Model capabilities are checked against the inputs the application actually needs, with multimodal input, tool choice, and thinking configuration verified separately. A relevance score from retrieval carries no permission or entity filtering duty, and the act of retrieval is not authorization.
Hypothetical drill sample: a store procurement group submits one paper document for checking. Its text reads: "This batch of Red Fuji apples was quoted by Stall A on 12 April, grade one, quotation valid until 15 April; the acceptance sheet for that day records 80 boxes received; the pesticide-residue test report number is still to be supplied." A separate draft sentence awaits judgement: "Stall A has undertaken to supply this batch until 30 April." The material states only that the quotation is valid until 15 April and states no supply period, so the supply undertaking in the draft sentence is not supported.
Configuration and implementation checks
The table below is built around that sample. The values are starting points for this hypothetical trial; the reason for each choice and the comparison object are given alongside.
| Configuration or check item | Hypothetical trial starting point | Reason and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
AIPROXY_API_ENDPOINT | Hypothetically filled with the service root address, no /v1 | The document requires the root address; compare against a form carrying /v1 and confirm startup validation passes |
AIPROXY_API_TOKEN | Hypothetically filled with a non-empty administrator token | The document requires a non-empty token matching the server; compare against an empty value and confirm the validation failure branch |
| Language model | Hypothetically one enabled system model | The document requires at least one language model; compare against a disabled state to confirm dialogue availability |
| Index model | Hypothetically one enabled system model | The document requires at least one index model; compare against a disabled state to confirm retrieval availability |
| Model capability check | Hypothetically checked against text input | The document requires checking against the inputs the application needs; compare against an image-input scenario to confirm the capability difference |
| Retrieval scope check | Hypothetically limited to the imported procurement document library | The document states retrieval carries no authorization; compare against a document not imported to confirm the result boundary |
Three common errors
- Treating the quotation validity date as a supply period. In the sample the quotation is valid until 15 April, while the draft sentence claims supply until 30 April. These are different fields, and the supply undertaking is not supported.
- Treating a pending test report number as already held. The sample states the number is still to be supplied; that field is in a missing state and cannot be used to conclude that testing is complete.
- Treating a retrieval hit as authorized execution. A returned document fragment indicates only that the content is relevant. Procurement approval and supply confirmation need separate downstream implementation, and retrieval is not authorization.
How to verify the setup
- Input the sample text and the draft sentence. Compare the quotation validity field with the supply-period field in the draft sentence. Only when subject, period, and field all match and the values are mutually exclusive should the result be recorded as a contradiction; here the fields differ, so it is recorded as not supported.
- Input the sentence "the pesticide-residue test report number is still to be supplied." Compare whether the number field holds a value. If it is empty, record an evidence gap and do not judge the testing status.
- Input a request carrying only related-stage evidence. Compare the authorization state in the request with the retrieval result. If a fragment is returned but no approval record exists, record it as pending verification and do not judge authorization complete.
Retrieval checks describe observation and failure branches; they do not guarantee a first hit, full recall, or an empty result for an unrelated query. An empty result can be checked against a clearly stated paper input of [] for downstream design, without claiming that a fictional rule must return []. Libraries built on different vector models cannot be jointly associated; check identifiers first and exclude non-matching ones rather than running a cross-model retrieval to compare missed recall. The optional paths shown in the overall document flow diagram do not mean every request executes all of them: image retrieval requires a corresponding image input and model capability, and reranking requires a model enabled by configuration. Judgements require the same subject, the same period, and the same field; only clearly mutually exclusive values in one field count as a contradiction. A field not stated, or evidence covering only a related stage, is recorded as not supported or pending verification. A pending review does not show a lack of operating permission; signing, reaching cooperation, and contract effectiveness are three distinct facts; a quotation validity period does not indicate a supply period.