What the documents look like
Platform product title and detail compliance work concerns the truthfulness of promotional wording and the display of qualifications. It does not cover parcel delivery. The materials involved come from platform rule centers, advertising-law compliance checklists, brand asset libraries and quality-inspection body reports. Everyday documents include product title tables, detail-page assets, prohibited-wording lists and inspection reports. In after-sales question handling, support staff and operations staff use these materials to check whether a statement a buyer has challenged is supported by the source documents.
Retrieval for this task must cope with several files describing the same product. A title table, a detail-page asset, a prohibited-wording list and an inspection report may each describe the same parameter in a different way. The update rhythm given for this category is weekly and at each new product launch; that rhythm matters here only because a retrieved statement can be current for one file and stale for another, so the version and date carried by each document need to be read together with the retrieved text.
Constraints at the retrieval step
The knowledge-base search node can be linked to one or more knowledge bases that use the same vector model. Knowledge bases built on different vector models cannot be linked together; the model identifier must be checked and non-matching bases excluded before any search is run. Reference content is output as an array and its length can be zero, which means the output path still runs even when nothing is retrieved.
The minimum relevance value is a filtering threshold and takes effect only under semantic retrieval or when result reranking is used. It is not a permission filter and does not separate entities or unauthorized records. A retrieval hit is not an authorization. When materials or requests are handed over during operations, the authorization state of those materials and requests has to be checked separately.
A hypothetical paper exercise sample: a product title table states that "this product has been tested by a national inspection body." The detail-page asset states "inspection report number JC-2024-0311, inspection date March 2024, inspected object a sample from batch A." The prohibited-wording list does not include the phrase "national inspection body." The original inspection report states "commissioned inspection, sample provided by the submitting party, the report is responsible only for the sample as submitted." A draft sentence awaiting judgment reads: "This product has passed inspection by a national inspection body and can be purchased with confidence." That sentence turns a commissioned inspection limited to the submitted sample into a conclusion about the product, which goes beyond what the materials state.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Hypothetical starting point for this exercise | Reason and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| Linked knowledge bases | One base each for the product title table, detail-page assets, prohibited-wording list and inspection report; verify the vector model identifier is identical | Only the same vector model may be linked together; check each model identifier and exclude non-matching bases |
| Search mode | Run the sample question once with semantic retrieval and once with full-text retrieval | Compare the two result sets before deciding whether to move to hybrid retrieval |
| Reference limit | Start at a token amount that covers a complete paragraph of the inspection report | Test with actual paragraphs of different lengths to see whether content is truncated, then adjust |
| Minimum relevance | Mark relevant and irrelevant samples first, then set a starting value | This value takes effect only under semantic retrieval or reranking; observe whether expected content survives filtering |
| Question optimization | Enable for ambiguous questions such as "is it qualified" | Compare the original question with the optimized question and check whether the subject was altered |
| Result reranking | When a rerank model is available and enabled by configuration, filter using the rerank score | Reranking produces a score between 0 and 1; compare its precision with the vector score |
Three common errors
- Treating a retrieval hit as an authorization basis. In the sample, the draft sentence being retrieved only shows that the wording exists in the asset library; it does not show that the wording has received compliance confirmation. The check is to input the draft sentence, compare the retrieval result with the authorization record, and observe whether an independent review conclusion exists.
- Reading a commissioned inspection limited to the submitted sample as a product qualification conclusion. The check is to input the original inspection report text, compare the inspected object stated in the report with the object the draft sentence refers to, and observe whether the two are the same object, the same period and the same field.
- Treating minimum relevance as a permission or entity filter. The check is to input an unrelated question, compare the returned content with the expected scope, and observe whether changing the threshold alters the set of visible records. This value affects relevance ordering only and does not isolate unauthorized records.
How to verify the setup
- Input the inspection report text "commissioned inspection, sample provided by the submitting party, the report is responsible only for the sample as submitted" and compare it with the draft sentence "this product has passed inspection by a national inspection body." Observe whether the draft sentence goes beyond the scope stated in the report. If the report states no overall product qualification conclusion, the wording is unsupported.
- Input the sample question and run it once with semantic retrieval and once with full-text retrieval, then compare the reference content returned by each path. Observe whether number and model queries are matched more precisely under full-text retrieval and whether natural-language questions are more complete under semantic retrieval.
- Use a paper input of an empty array to check the downstream path and observe whether the output path still runs. An empty result can be carried forward using the explicit input []; no claim is made that a given search must return []. If the return is empty, record that observation and do not infer that the rule does not exist.