What the documents look like
Permit handling takes place before customs declaration and determines whether a shipment may lawfully cross a border. The working materials for this category include automatic import licences, dual-use item licences, contracts and product descriptions. In order fulfilment and after-sales question handling, the conversation itself often carries licence numbers, contract clauses and end-use statements that must line up with entries in the competent commerce authority system, customs commodity codes, supplier files and customer end-use notes. Materials update irregularly and once per shipment; this page does not derive batch synchronisation, full synchronisation, real-time or transaction-triggered mechanisms from that pattern.
Conversation logs and auditing address a narrower question: whether the communication record for one order can be aligned with the business documents, whether run details can be retrieved in full, and whether feedback and status fields are retained as they were returned. The existence of a log does not by itself complete a compliance audit.
Constraints at the conversation logs step
Conversation identity depends on chatId and dataId. A chatId identifies one session under an application, and a dataId identifies one exchange under a session. Sessions created through different entry points have different origins. When retrieving the session list, source=api returns only sessions created through the API and does not return sessions from the page. Verification must confirm that the target session and the business record share the same origin, and must not count sessions from different entry points together.
When run details are needed, set detail=true in the request body as the official contract describes. In non-stream mode the result is held in responseData; in stream mode events distinguish the output, and the complete node response appears in flowResponses. Fields for different modules inside responseData can vary by version, and business data that is not returned cannot be assumed to be fully retained. The model and temperature parameters passed in the request have no effect; the orchestration decides these values.
Test mode and production calls may use different identity fields, so inputs, history and returned content must be checked separately. Reconciliation, retention and compliance requirements are carried out by a complete business plan.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample: the source material reads "This shipment falls under an automatic import licence, contract number HT-2024-0317, buyer is a domestic machinery manufacturer, seller is an overseas supplier, the end-use statement records use for assembly on its own production line, and the licence application status is submitted and pending approval." The draft sentence to be assessed is "The automatic import licence for this shipment has been approved; shipment can now be arranged." The source shows only submitted and pending approval, so the draft sentence presents a pending item as approved, which is unsupported.
Configuration and implementation checks
The table below gives the starting points and check items for this hypothetical exercise. The values are hypothetical starting points with a stated comparison object and are not official defaults.
| Configuration item | Hypothetical starting point | Reason and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| chatId | Reuse the session ID tied to the same business document | Compare against the session identifier in the business record to confirm the same origin |
| dataId | Take the data ID of the target exchange | Compare against the dataId returned by the exchange list, matching item by item |
| detail | Set to true | Enable when run details are needed, and compare against the content returned when false |
| source | Take api | Compare against the source field in the session list and exclude page sessions |
| loadCustomFeedbacks | Set to true | Enable when custom feedback must be read, and compare against the list returned when false |
| pageSize | Take 10 in this exercise | Compare against the number of items in the returned list and against total, adjusting as needed |
Three common errors
- Treating a pending item as approved. In the sample the licence application status is submitted and pending approval, while the draft sentence states it has been approved. The input is the status field, the comparison is between the source wording "pending approval" and the draft wording "approved", and the two are mutually exclusive values on the same field, so the draft is unsupported.
- Counting sessions from different entry points together. When retrieving the session list, source=api returns only API-created sessions. If page sessions are included, the input is the source value, the comparison object is the source field in the returned list, and the appearance of a non-api record shows that mixing has occurred.
- Treating the presence of a log as completion of a compliance audit. The input is the conversation record, the comparison object is the retention and reconciliation material required by the business plan, and when that material is absent only a gap can be recorded; the audit cannot be judged complete.
How to verify the setup
- Check conversation identity. The input is the chatId and dataId in the sample, and the comparison object is the chatId and dataId returned by the exchange list. The condition is met only when the two match item by item; when they differ, record the gap.
- Check retrieval of run details. The input is the request with detail=true, and the comparison object is each module field in the returned responseData, compared field by field against the business document. When a field is missing, record it as unsupported and do not assert that retention is complete.
- Check the draft sentence against the source. The input is the sample source text and the draft sentence, and the comparison object is the licence status field. The source gives pending approval and the draft gives approved; mutually exclusive values on the same field form a contradiction, so the draft is judged unsupported. The expectation is to record the contradiction, without claiming that a live test was performed.