What the documents look like
Community group-buying leader operations rely on four document families: leader agreements, commission tables, pickup lists and community announcements. Records update daily and per group. The copy-drafting task draws subjects, goods, prices, campaign scope and validity periods from these materials, then hands them to a multi-turn conversation that produces publishable text.
Two features of this category shape the drafting step. First, the same fact often sits in different documents with different scopes. A commission rate in a commission table carries an applicable store range; a leader agreement carries a signing period; an announcement draft carries a start and end date. Second, a published sentence in a community group becomes a commitment. When a commission ratio written for one region is presented as universal, or a campaign end date is presented as permanently valid, the result is a wrong promise, complaints and leader attrition. The multi-turn and prompt layer exists to keep each generation inside the supplied material and to leave gaps visible when evidence is absent.
Constraints at the multi-turn prompts step
The prompt must state the material scope, the drafting task and the handling of missing evidence. History handling needs to distinguish what a new session actually carries from what a continued session carries, and a follow-up question needs a check that the reference was resolved correctly. Model and length settings need a check against the model's supported context and reply ceiling, with long documents and follow-up combinations tested separately. Reply format follows the downstream consumer; when json_schema is selected, the corresponding format requirement is filled in and the returned structure is checked. A similarity score describes textual similarity only and does not perform permission or subject isolation. Within one knowledge base the same embedding model is required; different models cannot be associated together, so identifiers are checked first and non-matching entries excluded. Interactive nodes wait for user input, and record status and hidden dialogue follow the documented explanation, without assuming automatic submission or snapshot guarantees.
Hypothetical paper exercise. The material text supplied for comparison is: "Leader agreement, Annex 2: This agreement applies to leaders newly signed between 1 March 2024 and 30 June 2024." "Commission table A: The fresh-produce category commission rate is 8%, applicable stores are the East China Region 1 fulfilment sites." "Community announcement draft: This fresh-produce promotion runs from 10 May 2024 to 20 May 2024." The draft sentence to be judged is: "All leaders receive the 8% fresh-produce commission for the whole of 2024, and the campaign is permanently valid." The subject, period and validity in this draft sentence each differ from the material.
Configuration and implementation checks
The table below lists documented settings or implementation checks relevant to this feature and this drafting task. The value column gives a hypothetical starting point for this exercise and names the comparison target.
| Configuration item | Hypothetical starting point for this exercise | Comparison and check method |
|---|---|---|
| AI model | A model whose configuration window shows multimodal and tool-calling support | Compare the displayed maximum context and tool-calling capability against the long-document plus follow-up requirement |
| Memory turns | A small number of history turns retained | Compare against the context a continued session actually carries, confirming the scope of reference resolution |
| Reply ceiling | Raised to suit announcement length | Compare against the length needed for a complete announcement and observe whether output is truncated |
| Temperature | Raised for the copywriting scenario | Compare against the stability requirement and confirm no statement outside the material appears |
| Reply format | json_schema when a fixed structure is needed | Fill in the format requirement and check the returned structure against it |
| Hidden AI output | Enabled when a later node rewrites the text | Check whether the later node receives the AI reply output |
Three common errors
- Treating the applicable store range in commission table A as covering all leaders. Input is the commission table A text; the comparison object is "All leaders" in the draft sentence; the observable result is that the draft subject exceeds the material scope.
- Writing the campaign start and end dates as permanently valid. Input is the community announcement draft text; the comparison object is "permanently valid" in the draft sentence; the observable result is that the validity period differs from the material.
- Writing the leader agreement applicability period as the whole year. Input is the leader agreement Annex 2 text; the comparison object is "the whole of 2024" in the draft sentence; the observable result is that the period exceeds the range stated in the agreement.
How to verify the setup
- Input the three material sentences and the draft sentence from the hypothetical exercise. Compare the subject, period and validity in the draft sentence against the fields stated in the material. A draft subject exceeding the applicable stores, a period exceeding the agreement range, or a validity differing from the announcement means the draft sentence is not supported by the material.
- Input the material sentences from the hypothetical exercise and a follow-up question, "What is the East China Region 1 fresh-produce commission?" Compare whether the answer cites the 8% from commission table A together with its applicable stores. Citing a rate from another category, or omitting the applicable stores, means reference resolution did not follow the material.
- Input an empty quote list
[]and one question. Compare whether the downstream design handles the missing evidence as missing. Adding a commission rate or campaign date that is absent from the material means the missing-evidence handling did not take effect.
These checks describe expected observations on paper. No test, deployment or approval has been performed, and any field not present in the supplied material remains unknown.