What the documents look like
Trade returns and claims cover reverse logistics and liability determination after export. The working materials come from customer email, quality inspection reports, customs systems and insurance claim systems. The documents handled day to day are the return agreement, the claim letter, the quality report and the return customs declaration. These materials update irregularly, case by case, and drafting product and marketing copy requires matching each promotional sentence against the subject, object and state recorded in those materials.
Two features of this category shape the drafting task. First, the return reason and the liability position are usually distributed across several documents rather than stated in one place, so a single promotional sentence can draw on a claim request, an inspection finding and a return agreement at once. Second, the stage of each document matters: a claim letter records a demand, a return agreement records an arrangement, and an inspection report records a sampled finding. A sentence that treats a demand as an admission, or a sample finding as a whole-batch conclusion, moves beyond what the materials state.
Constraints at the model connections step
Model access depends on AI Proxy. From V4.17.0, AI Proxy is a required dependency. Both the App service and an Admin service that reuses App/Service configuration must set AIPROXY_API_ENDPOINT and a non-empty AIPROXY_API_TOKEN; missing either one causes startup validation to fail. AIPROXY_API_ENDPOINT takes the service root address and does not carry /v1. Model channels, model IDs, model mapping and enablement are configured on the administrator model provider page. Model probing covers only system models that are currently enabled; disabled models do not participate in probing and produce no history.
Retrieval relevance scores do not carry permission filtering duties, and retrieval itself does not constitute authorization. A similarity value is not a category, entity or permission filter, and it does not exclude unrelated businesses or unauthorized records. Where a drafting check depends on documents held in a knowledge base, access to those documents must already exist in the target retrieval scope or in an explicit manual input; a missing document is recorded as a gap rather than resolved by retrieval.
Hypothetical exercise sample: a foreign trade company handles one return claim. The material text reads: "The return agreement states that the buyer returned batch A, 120 pieces, on 10 March 2026, and the reason field records a size discrepancy; the quality report states that 20 pieces were sampled from this batch and 6 pieces exceeded the contract tolerance; the claim letter requires the seller to bear the return freight and inspection fee for batch A." The draft sentence to be assessed is: "Batch A was confirmed by both parties to have a quality problem, and the seller agreed to bear all return freight." The phrases "confirmed by both parties" and "agreed to bear" have no corresponding record in the materials and are unsupported.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Hypothetical exercise starting point | Verification method |
|---|---|---|
AIPROXY_API_ENDPOINT | Suppose it is set to http://aiproxy:3000 | Compare with the actual deployment root address and confirm no /v1 is appended |
AIPROXY_API_TOKEN | Suppose the administrator token set at deployment is entered | Compare character by character with the server-side configuration and confirm it is non-empty |
| Model channel and model mapping | Suppose a return copy channel is created, with the model ID corresponding to the upstream model field | Start a test on the channel test page and observe the returned result and request duration |
| Model enablement | Suppose only the language model and the index model are enabled | Check the enablement marks in the model list; disabled models do not participate in probing |
| Model probing | Suppose the probe interval is set to 30 minutes | Compare with the documented 5 to 60 minute integer range, save, and observe the status panel |
Three common errors
- Treating "confirmed by both parties" in the draft sentence as a fact recorded in the materials. The input is the draft sentence above together with the material text; the comparison is whether "confirmed by both parties" has a corresponding record; the observable result is that the materials record only the buyer's return and the inspection report's sampling conclusion, with no record of joint confirmation, so the phrase is unsupported.
- Treating "agreed to bear all return freight" as an established commitment. The input is the claim letter and the return agreement; the comparison is whether "agreed to bear" has a signed or replied record; the observable result is that the claim letter only makes a demand and there is no record of seller agreement, so the phrase remains to be verified.
- Extending the sampling conclusion of the quality report to a whole-batch conclusion. The input is the quality report sentence "20 pieces were sampled, of which 6 exceeded tolerance"; the comparison is whether the coverage of that sentence matches the draft sentence "batch A has a quality problem"; the observable result is that the sampling conclusion covers only the sampled pieces, and the whole-batch conclusion lacks support.
How to verify the setup
- Input the hypothetical material text and the draft sentence, compare whether each factual assertion in the draft sentence can be found in the source text with the same subject, same object and same state, and observe that when "confirmed by both parties" has no corresponding record it is judged unsupported, not judged as a denial or a conflict.
- Input the claim letter and the return agreement, compare whether "agreed to bear" is supported by a seller signature, reply or agreement clause, and observe that when only the claim demand exists it is judged to be verified, with the evidence gap retained and no authorization or effective clause supplied.
- Input the quality report sampling sentence and the whole-batch wording of the draft sentence, compare whether the coverage is consistent, and observe that when the sampling conclusion cannot support the whole-batch assertion it is judged unsupported. If retrieval returns an empty result, use an explicit paper input of an empty list to check the downstream design, and do not claim that a fictional rule retrieval necessarily returns empty.