What the documents look like
For document comparison in MCN operations, this page examines FastGPT tool calls. Compare the material received with the sources used in the answer. The examples are hypothetical.
Constraints at the tool calls step
An MCN document comparison can examine a creator contract’s cooperation scope beside a session schedule, without assuming a dedicated contract tool already exists. Proposed inputs contain both passages and their creator identities while lacking an additional session agreement. A proposed reading tool should describe the supplied-text scope and unsupported questions. Its parameters must retain source identities rather than deriving a party or complete contractual coverage from a document title.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Check | Proposed material or condition | Evidence to inspect |
|---|---|---|
| Reading scope | Supplied contract and schedule passages | No assumption of complete cooperation access |
| Required sources | Contract supplied; schedule absent | Actual call and request inspected |
| Creator identity | The subject of each passage | Remove unrelated parties before comparison |
| Tool connection | Only reading tools needed for this question | Actual invocation matches its intended purpose |
| Termination | This call reaches a termination node | No later AI summary expected to supply evidence |
Documented conditions
| Documented item / implementation check | Condition |
|---|---|
Tool description | Describe purpose, inputs and non-applicable situations. |
Tool parameters | Inspect module and plugin parameters separately. |
Required parameters | The model may not invoke a tool without suitable required inputs. |
Tool connections | Available tools must connect to the calling module. |
Tool-call termination | Termination ends the call without a later AI summary. |
Three common errors
If required input includes both materials but the actual request contains only the contract, a suitable description does not guarantee a call or an automatic follow-up question. Inspect the actual request and parameter origins, collect the schedule and retry. Another failure compares a different creator’s schedule. Inspect both source subjects and separate unresolved identity from textual differences; a plausible difference report does not establish breach. If a contract naming promotion categories becomes permission for a specific model, inspect the category passage and model-specific cooperation evidence. A broad category does not establish item permission; retain the gap without corresponding material.
How to verify the setup
Connect only a small set of reading tools initially. Inspect transmitted passages, the actual called tool and returned sources, then repeat with corresponding creator material. Configurable parameters do not establish business approval of an interpretation. A termination node ends this tool call without a subsequent AI summary of its results. Contract approval, schedule updates or publication require separately verified authorization and real operation records.
| Material context | Scope |
|---|---|
| Document types | Influencer Contract, Training Records, Violation Handling Form and Account Scheduling |
| Candidate sources | MCN Backend, Platform Violation Notice, Influencer Account Data and Contract Ledger |
| Technical baseline | FastGPT v4.17.2 |