What the documents look like
Franchise supervision for convenience stores centers on head office oversight of how franchisees carry out standards. This differs from direct-operated ordering because the drafting task must trace promotional wording, product status and display requirements back to headquarters-issued materials rather than to internal replenishment records. The working materials are the store visit form, the franchise contract, rectification notices and display standards, with data arriving from the supervision app, POS sales, the franchise system and store photographs. Weekly and monthly update rhythms mean the same material exists in successive versions, so a draft sentence needs a version and an applicable scope before its wording can be checked against source text. Errors in this area can lead to franchise disputes, brand damage and contract breach, which makes source tracing a preliminary check rather than an afterthought.
Constraints at the citation tracing step
The knowledge base search node may select one or more knowledge bases that share the same vector model for vector search. Knowledge bases with different vector models cannot be associated together; the identifier is checked first and non-matching bases are excluded, without running a cross-model search to compare missed recall. The node outputs references as an array whose length may be zero, meaning the output path still completes when no content is found; an empty array does not mean the workflow has errored and stopped. Search output is passed to the answering step, where each answer is checked against the cited original text. Similarity scores and the minimum relevance value are filtering thresholds and do not perform permission or entity isolation; retrieval itself is not authorization. Full-text search, semantic search, hybrid search and result reranking are optional paths, image retrieval requires image input and model capability, and reranking requires a model enabled in settings. The documented flow diagram lists paths that are not all executed on every request. Thinking budget is a model reasoning-strength setting and is separate from the reference token limit.
Hypothetical exercise sample: an annex to a franchise contract, Display Standard, March 2026 version, states that the second shelf of the end cap displays ambient-temperature milk drinks, and that the single-store single-day promotional price tag is printed from the headquarters unified template. A store visit form for the same period records that the second shelf of the end cap holds ambient-temperature milk drinks and the price tag is handwritten. A draft sentence to be judged reads: this store's promotional price tag follows the headquarters unified template. The check targets the same store, the same period and the same field, price tag form. The source text and the draft sentence hold mutually exclusive values on that field, which is a contradiction. If the store visit form does not record the price tag form, the result is unsupported and the evidence gap is retained.
Configuration and implementation checks
The table lists only documented settings or implementation checks relevant to this page's task. Values are starting points for this hypothetical exercise and are not official defaults.
| Configuration or check item | Hypothetical exercise starting point | Reason and comparison object |
|---|---|---|
| Associated knowledge bases | Select display standard base and franchise contract base | Bases may be associated together only when vector model identifiers match; compare against excluded non-matching bases |
| Reference content output | Accept as array, length zero allowed | Compare against downstream design for empty arrays to confirm the path completes |
| Reference input handoff | Pass search output to the answering step | Compare each answer against the cited original text to confirm traceability |
| Search mode | Route numbers and template names to full-text or hybrid search | Compare against semantic search results; exact fields favor keyword hits |
| Minimum relevance | Hypothetical starting point 0.5 | Compare against recalled content; a low value makes results broad |
| Reply format | Keep default for ordinary question answering | Compare against a json_schema requirement; modify only for fixed structures |
Three common errors
- Treating a similarity score as permission or entity filtering, so that raising the minimum relevance is assumed to exclude unrelated stores or unauthorized records. The check is the retrieval scope and the material version; permission decisions require a separate system implementation.
- Associating knowledge bases with different vector models and then inferring missed recall or redundant returns. The documentation states only the same-vector-model requirement; runtime results are not documented, so the identifier is checked and actual observations are recorded.
- Mixing thinking budget with the reference token limit, using reasoning strength to control how many reference tokens are returned. The fields differ, and each configuration item is checked separately.
Corresponding checks: check one, input two bases whose vector model identifiers differ, compare whether they can be associated together, and the condition is met only when association is possible. Check two, input a clearly labelled paper empty array [], compare whether the downstream handoff design completes, and the condition is met only when the path completes. Check three, input one draft sentence and the source material text, compare the same subject, same period and same field values, record mutually exclusive values as a contradiction and an unstated field as unsupported.
How to verify the setup
- Verification one: input the display standard text and the draft sentence from the hypothetical sample, compare the price tag form field values. The material states the headquarters unified template, the draft sentence claims template use, and the store visit form records handwriting; a mutually exclusive value on the same field is identified as a contradiction.
- Verification two: input the version of the store visit form that does not record the price tag form, compare whether that field is stated, and record an unstated field as unsupported while retaining the evidence gap.
- Verification three: input the search output array, compare whether it is passed to the answering step and matched item by item against the original text, and the condition is met only when references are traceable. An empty array is accepted under the documented zero-length allowance, and no error is asserted on that basis. All three state expectations and were not actually executed.