What the documents look like
For after-sales questions in Franchise fee settlement, this page examines FastGPT retrieval. Retrieve payment category and current handling action without turning acknowledged material into returned funds. The examples are hypothetical.
Constraints at the retrieval step
A proposed franchise aftercare packet asks about deposit return, acknowledges received attachments and separately reports a sent service-fee explanation. No deposit review or payment record is supplied. Retrieve deposit-versus-service-fee and material-versus-funds identities. Acknowledgement establishes received documents, not acceptance for processing, approval or payment. Compare the literal deposit question with full follow-up candidates. Repeated sent wording supplies no current progress, and a missing outcome does not establish refusal. The exercise checks evidential stages without determining a real entitlement or financial handling result for a store.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Material check | Conditions in this test | Implementation evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Payment category | Deposit and service fee | Attribute candidates separately. |
| Received object | Attachments | Do not make returned funds. |
| Added stage | Receipt of attachments does not establish acceptance for processing | Compare optimized question. |
| Reference clipping | Retain attachment object | Do not quote received alone. |
| Later record | Matching store and payment | Update supported state only. |
Documented conditions
| Documented item / implementation check | Condition |
|---|---|
Associated knowledge bases | Knowledge bases associated with one search node must use the same embedding model. |
Search mode | Semantic, full-text and hybrid modes are available. |
Citation limit | Citation limits are measured in tokens. |
Minimum relevance | Range 0–1; active for semantic search or reranking. |
Question optimization | Resolves references and expands questions. |
Three common errors
First, a service-fee explanation may answer for the deposit; inspect candidate category and enquiry correspondence. Second, optimization may turn attachment receipt into an accepted refund case; compare both questions for an added handling stage. Third, references may drop attachment and retain received; inspect the object delivered to answering, since receipt of documents does not establish that funds were returned. These concern category, rewritten stage and reference object. Relevance scores cannot decide refund status, and the current source gap requires actual supporting text rather than a more confident retrieval description.
How to verify the setup
Ask which category is requested, what the handler received and what the service-fee page establishes, inspecting actual quotations. Compare semantic, full-text and hybrid retrieval on the same questions, including same-store different-category examples. Under token limits, retain attachment and deposit identities. Added payment evidence needs store and payment correspondence before updating supported state. This exercise decides no return conditions and performs no financial action. Acknowledged attachments supply neither review nor payment or settled accounts, which need their own applicable actual records beyond these proposed source passages.
| Material context | Scope |
|---|---|
| Document types | Franchise Fee Invoice, Deposit Ledger, Deduction Notice and Contract Payment Plan |
| Candidate sources | Financial System, Franchise Contract, Bank Statement and Store Violation Records |
| Technical baseline | FastGPT v4.17.2 |