What the documents look like
Multi-warehouse allocation happens at the order routing stage and decides which warehouse ships an order, which differs from the courier handover step. Allocation rules, inventory sync tables, transfer orders and stockout alerts form the daily document set, with data drawn from WMS, OMS, ERP inventory and platform inventory interfaces, updated daily or hourly. These traits shape the evidence boundary for copy drafting: sellable stock, shipping-warehouse priority and stockout status are live business facts, so drafted copy may only cite a confirmed inventory basis and may not let a model infer or add stock quantities or shipping promises. Supply chain planners, WMS administrators and e-commerce operators reviewing copy need to separate sentences taken from allocation rule documents from business states that still await verification.
Constraints at the multi-turn prompts step
Multi-turn dialogue involves history, question optimization, model length and reply format. For history, check which context is actually carried in and distinguish a new session from a continued session. For question optimization, knowledge-base continuous dialogue requires checking pronoun resolution and question expansion, and short questions do not all qualify. For model and length, check the context and reply settings the model supports, and test long-document plus follow-up combinations. Choose reply format by what the downstream step consumes; when json_schema is selected, fill in the corresponding format requirement and verify the returned structure. Prompts need to state the material scope, the answering task and how to handle missing evidence, so the model does not add business facts.
Hypothetical paper test case: the source material reads, "Allocation rule document, clause 3: orders in the East China region ship first from the Shanghai warehouse; when Shanghai sellable stock falls below the safety stock, route to the Hangzhou warehouse. The inventory sync table shows sellable stock of 0 units for a given item at Shanghai and 120 units at Hangzhou." The draft sentence under review reads, "East China orders for this item ship from the Shanghai warehouse, and stock is sufficient." Comparing the draft against the source: the source states Shanghai sellable stock is 0 units and routing to Hangzhou is triggered, while the draft claims Shanghai shipping and sufficient stock, which does not match the source state. If the draft instead reads, "East China orders for this item currently route to the Hangzhou warehouse, where 120 units are sellable," it matches the source.
Configuration and implementation checks
The table below is tied to the sample above and lists documented settings or implementation checks relevant to this feature and the primary task.
| Configuration item | Hypothetical starting value for this trial | Reason for the choice and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| Memory turns | Hypothetically set to 4 turns | The sample involves two follow-up turns on allocation rules and inventory state, so the carried context needs checking; compare with 2 turns and observe whether the earlier allocation rule is referenced |
| Reply cap | Hypothetically set to 800 | The sample draft sentence is short, so truncation needs checking; compare with 400 and observe whether the allocation condition is output in full |
| Temperature | Hypothetically set to 0.3 | The sample is rule-bound copy verification and needs stable reproduction; compare with 0.8 and observe whether stock wording absent from the source appears |
| Reply format | Hypothetically kept at default | The sample needs no fixed structure; if changed to json_schema, the format requirement must be filled in and the returned structure verified |
| Thinking configuration | Hypothetically set to no thinking | The sample is a simple fact comparison; compare with standard thinking and observe whether inference absent from the source is introduced |
| Multimodal recognition | Hypothetically off | The sample material is text with no image or audio input; if the material contained an inventory screenshot, image recognition would require a model that supports it before being enabled |
All values above are hypothetical starting points for this trial, not official defaults, and need comparison against adjacent values with observations recorded.
Three common errors
- Accepting "stock is sufficient" in the draft sentence at face value. The source records only 0 sellable units at Shanghai and 120 at Hangzhou, gives no safety stock figure, and therefore cannot support a judgment of sufficiency. To check, input the draft sentence and the source, compare whether "sufficient" has a corresponding field, and observe that the wording is unsupported.
- Treating an old inventory state carried in from history as the current state. If an earlier turn in the sample mentioned stock at Shanghai, a continued session may reuse the old value. To check, input both a new-session request and a continued-session request, compare the context carried in, and observe whether the continued session cites a stock figure that is no longer valid.
- Treating a retrieval similarity score as a permission or entity filter. If retrieval in the sample returns inventory records for other regions, a higher or lower similarity does not indicate whether the record belongs to the East China order scope. To check, input the query and the returned list, compare the region field on each record, and observe whether non-East-China records are mixed in.
How to verify the setup
- Input the source material and the draft sentence from the hypothetical sample, compare the shipping warehouse and inventory state in the draft against the corresponding fields in the source, and observe whether the output restates the source condition or marks it unsupported. The expectation is that mismatches are pointed out; a first-hit match is not assumed.
- Input a new-session request and a continued-session request, compare the history scope carried into each, and observe whether the continued session cites only the currently valid inventory state. The expectation is that the old state is not reused; when results are empty, verify the downstream design against an explicit paper input of [].
- Input a retrieval query containing cross-region records, compare the region identifier on returned records against the order scope, and observe whether non-matching records are excluded. The expectation is that only same-scope records are kept; cross-model retrieval is not run to compare missed recall.