What the documents look like
For after-sales questions in Store counts and loss control, this page examines FastGPT multi-turn prompts. Preserve counting coverage, recount status and unresolved responsibility in inventory-discrepancy follow-ups. The examples are hypothetical.
Constraints at the multi-turn prompts step
An inventory-service exercise starts with a hypothetical note: an initial shelf count differs from the ledger, while back-room stock is excluded. A follow-up adds a proposed recount. Neither a whole-store result nor a discrepancy cause is supplied. The prompt should retain shelf coverage and the missing back-room count, organizing checks without turning a partial count into store-wide loss. A later question about who is responsible also lacks attribution evidence. A roster name identifies a shift without assigning fault. These sources support no actual disciplinary or accounting action.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Counting follow-up | Hypothetical input | Inspection subject |
|---|---|---|
| Coverage | Initial shelf count only | Back-room gap separately |
| Stage | Proposed recount | Actual recount record |
| Person | Shift-roster name | No responsibility inferred |
| Period | Goods in the same interval | No cross-period total |
| Action | Organize review tasks | No inventory or disciplinary write |
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 history compression drops the excluded back-room sentence and the answer declares a whole-store shortage, compare the original note, submitted history and response to locate expanded coverage.
- If a proposed recount becomes completed, inspect the planning verb and actual recount record. Missing measurements leave the discrepancy unconfirmed.
- If a person from an earlier roster becomes responsible for the discrepancy, inspect roster purpose and cause evidence. Presence and responsibility are different findings.
How to verify the setup
Repeat the question with the partial count, recount plan and later actual records, checking that supported coverage changes only with evidence. Inspect the same counting period and goods before combining back-room material; stocks from different periods do not form a current store total. Investigate history delivery when an obtained source disappears from the request. Identify missing cause records separately when no investigation exists. The conversation can organize review tasks without adjusting inventory or confirming liability because a name appeared in history.
| Material context | Scope |
|---|---|
| Document types | Inventory Count Sheet, Discrepancy Analysis, Spoilage Approval and Monitoring Footage Review Records |
| Candidate sources | POS Inventory, WMS, Monitoring System and SB/T Inventory Count Standards |
| Technical baseline | FastGPT v4.17.2 |