What the documents look like
For after-sales questions in B2B marketplaces, this page examines FastGPT multi-turn prompts. Preserve the separate support provided by commitments, repair records and delivery evidence during after-sales follow-ups. The examples are hypothetical.
Constraints at the multi-turn prompts step
A proposed after-sales exercise can pair a warranty commitment with a repair record. A repair within the warranty period does not automatically conflict with that commitment. Define the current matter and available sources in the prompt, keeping settlement status, occurrence of repair and service performance as separate questions. If an answer uses only a settlement statement to confirm every commitment, trace the contract clause and event evidence. Without them, the conclusion cannot be verified.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Conversation or implementation check | After-sales object | Verification |
|---|---|---|
| Commitment and event | Read warranty terms separately from repair records | No automatic conflict from repair occurrence |
| Current matter | Match transaction and terms to history | No imported commitment from another transaction |
| Question optimization | Preserve subject and restrictions | Compare the complete original and rewrite |
| Delivery gap | A contract date is not receipt evidence | Inspect actual input after adding event sources |
| Business handoff | Separate a reply from downstream receipt | Record content actually received by the route |
Documented conditions
| Documented item / implementation check | Condition |
|---|---|
Prompt and task | Define sources, the task and evidence-gap handling. |
Conversation history | Inspect the history actually submitted. |
Question optimization | Review reference resolution and question expansion. |
Model and length | Inspect context and reply length separately. |
Reply format | json_schema needs its format and parsing validation. |
Three common errors
- If settlement becomes complete service performance, compare contract terms, repair events and answer. Check support; repair during warranty also does not by itself establish breach.
- If handling this case as before borrows another transaction’s promise, retain original question, history and optimized wording. Check subject and limits against an empty-history test of current sources.
- If a promised delivery time becomes actual receipt, inspect logistics or signature evidence. A commitment establishes no event; after supplementation, inspect current input and citations rather than treating a reply as a created ticket.
How to verify the setup
A promised delivery date without logistics or receipt evidence does not establish actual delivery. An answer may still be generated, so trace its statements to the originals, checking for a commitment converted into a completed event. After adding event evidence, record delivery of the new content to the turn and its citation in the answer. If a service handoff is also needed, inspect that route’s receiving result separately; a conversational reply does not establish a created case or completed operation.
| Material context | Scope |
|---|---|
| Document types | Business Certification Documents, Inquiry and Quotation Sheet, Electronic Contract and Platform Settlement Statement |
| Candidate sources | B2B Platform, National Enterprise Credit Information Publicity System, Payment Transaction Records and Logistics Tracking |
| Technical baseline | FastGPT v4.17.2 |