What the documents look like
Livestream after-sales material forms around a burst that follows a single broadcast session. Four document types appear together in that window: livestream order lists, refund requests, reshipment orders, and reply-script templates. They are strongly tied to what the host promised on air. Support staff match orders, refunds, reshipments, and explanation wording against each other, then decide the next action.
This material updates per session and per day. That rhythm shapes the checking step: order lists and refund requests from the same session belong in the same comparison batch. Comparing across batches tends to mix promises from different sessions. The product-information and option-answering task maps a user's product question to existing material and states which answers can be given, which go to a human agent, and which wait for confirmation.
Constraints at the workflow routing step
The Form Input node is a user-interaction node. When it triggers, the conversation enters an interaction state, the workflow state is recorded, and execution continues after the user finishes interacting. The User Selection node behaves the same way at trigger, and when the user makes a choice the node evaluates that choice and runs the corresponding branch. These are documented node behaviors. They do not imply a global state switch or an automatic judgment capability.
Product-information and option-answering work needs to collect the specific question object, such as an order number, a product name, or a question type. The Form Input node can carry that collection. The User Selection node can carry branch selection. Collected values must be passed explicitly to later retrieval, judgment, or interface nodes, and output must be compared against input item by item. Order writes, document backfill, and external status synchronization require a separate business interface or a later process. The form itself only collects values.
Retrieval is a material-matching action and does not perform authorization judgment. Semantic recall and relevance scores do not handle permission or entity isolation. Libraries built on different vector models cannot be associated together; the identifier must be checked first and non-matching libraries excluded. Optional paths shown in an overall document flow diagram do not mean every request executes all of them. Image retrieval requires a corresponding image input and model capability. Reranking requires the model and must be enabled through its setting.
Configuration and implementation checks
The table below uses the hypothetical drill sample on this page and lists documented settings or implementation check items tied to this feature and the primary task. The values are starting points for this hypothetical trial, not official defaults.
| Configuration item | Hypothetical trial starting point | How to check |
|---|---|---|
| Form Input node | Collect order number and question type as two required fields | After submission, check whether the values passed to later nodes |
| User Selection node | Set two branches: "look up product material" and "hand off to a human agent" | Verify each branch connection and the selection result |
| Interaction state | The node enters interaction state after triggering | Check the hidden dialog box and the recorded state |
| Retrieval library identifier | Use only libraries on the same vector model | Check the library identifier and exclude libraries on a different model |
| Empty-result handling | Use the paper input [] to check downstream design | Observe whether downstream processes the empty result as such |
| External operations | Order writes and status synchronization use a separate interface | Check whether the interface node exists independently |
Hypothetical drill sample: after a certain livestream session, support receives a user message reading "The gift with order A did not arrive, and I want to clarify." The proposed draft sentence is "The gift issue with order A is confirmed, and a reshipment will be arranged." The request awaiting a decision is "Please reply to the user with this draft sentence." In this sample the subject is order A, the object is the gift, the status is not received, and the valid scope is that session's livestream orders. The phrases "is confirmed" and "a reshipment will be arranged" in the draft need to be checked against supporting material.
Three common errors
- Treating a retrieval result as authorized execution. The input is the order number collected by the form, the comparison object is the material returned by retrieval, and the observable result is whether that material contains a reshipment basis for this order. A retrieval hit does not equal an approved reshipment. When an approval record is absent, the action remains unsupported.
- Writing a pending-review status as completed. The input is a refund request whose status is "pending review," the comparison object is "is confirmed" in the draft sentence, and the observable result is whether the two share the same field and the same value. Pending review does not demonstrate a lack of operating permission, and it does not equal approval.
- Associating libraries on different vector models. The input is two library identifiers, the comparison object is the vector model identifier, and the observable result is whether the identifiers match. When they do not match, exclude that library and do not run cross-model retrieval to compare missed recall.
How to verify the setup
- Verification one: use the user message text from the hypothetical sample, enter the order number and question type into the Form Input node, and compare whether the submitted values pass fully to the later retrieval node. The condition is met when the later node receives both fields with values identical to the input.
- Verification two: use the draft sentence "The gift issue with order A is confirmed, and a reshipment will be arranged," enter it into the material-check step, and compare whether "is confirmed" and "a reshipment will be arranged" have supporting material. The condition is met when material contains an approval record for the same order and the same object. When that record is missing, record the result as unsupported rather than as a denial.
- Verification three: use the request awaiting a decision, "Please reply to the user with this draft sentence," enter it into the User Selection node, and compare whether the selection result runs the "hand off to a human agent" branch. The condition is met when the selection result matches the branch connection and the reply action does not run automatically while the approval record is absent.
This page addresses only livestream after-sales concentrated handling, product-information and option-answering, and workflow routing. During operational handover, the authorization state of materials, actions, and requests must be kept distinct from retrieval or form collection.