What the documents look like
Letter-of-credit examination and presentation serves the paying conditions of a bank. The working focus is document consistency rather than tax matching, which separates this category from export tax rebate filing. Materials refresh with every transaction. The recurring inputs are the issuing bank's advice, UCP600 clauses, the freight forwarder's bill of lading, and the bank's presentation record. The documents handled day to day are the letter of credit, commercial invoice, bill of lading, insurance policy, and draft. The slowest steps are reviewing credit terms, producing conforming documents, and handling discrepancies. A comparison task therefore has to place several materials from one transaction inside a single semantic frame and check field-by-field correspondence. Any missing field can affect the presentation outcome.
Constraints at the tool calls step
A tool description tells the model what the tool is for. The description states the input conditions and the situations in which the tool should not be called. Tool parameters fall into two groups: parameters of system modules are already fixed, while parameters of a plugin are configurable. Two values matter inside a parameter: the parameter description and whether it is required. Where a suitable required parameter is absent from context, the model may not call the tool; prompts can guide the user to supply the parameter. In advanced orchestration, available tools are connected to the tool call module, and it is advisable to start with a small number of tools and tune before adding more. The tool call termination node ends the current call, stops further tool calls, and stops the AI from summarizing tool results. Custom variables extend the variable inputs of a tool, letting a node that is not treated as a tool parameter receive a parameter description.
Hypothetical drill sample. Source text one, letter of credit excerpt: Issuing bank A issued an irrevocable credit on 1 March 2025 in favour of exporter B, amount USD 120,000, port of loading Shanghai, port of discharge Rotterdam, latest shipment date 15 April 2025. Source text two, commercial invoice excerpt: exporter B issued an invoice on 10 April 2025, amount USD 118,000, trade term CIF Rotterdam, port of loading Shanghai. Source text three, bill of lading excerpt: carrier C issued the bill of lading on 12 April 2025, port of loading Shanghai, port of discharge Rotterdam, freight prepaid. Draft sentence to be assessed: "Under this presentation the invoice amount agrees with the credit amount, the bill of lading shipment date meets the latest shipment date, and submission on a documents-consistent basis is recommended." This draft sentence is compared field by field against the three source texts to determine whether the invoice amount agrees with the credit amount and whether the bill of lading shipment date falls on or before 15 April 2025.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Hypothetical trial starting point for this page | Explanation and check method |
|---|---|---|
| Tool description | State that inputs are the letter of credit, invoice, and bill of lading source texts, and output is a field comparison result | The description tells the model the tool's purpose and must state input conditions and situations where the tool should not be called |
| Tool parameters | Parameter descriptions name each material field; required status set to required for this sample | Where a suitable required parameter is absent the model may not call the tool; complete it through interaction and check the actual request |
| Tool connection | Connect the comparison tool for this page to the tool call module | In advanced orchestration, connect available tools to the tool call module and tune with a small number of tools first |
| Custom variables | Supply parameter descriptions for fields such as invoice amount and bill of lading date | Custom variables extend a tool's variable inputs for nodes not treated as tool parameters |
| Tool call termination | Attach the termination node after comparison completes | The termination node ends the current tool call, stops further tool calls, and stops AI summarization of tool results |
| Required-parameter handling | Record whether the bill of lading source text was supplied before execution | Where a required parameter is missing, observe whether the call proceeds or returns a request for the missing text |
Three common errors
- Writing the tool description as a general statement without input conditions or the situations where the tool should not be called. Input is the three source texts above; compare whether the tool description contains input conditions and non-invocation situations, and observe whether the model still calls the tool when materials are missing.
- Treating the parameter description as a guarantee of execution. Input is invoice amount USD 118,000 against credit amount USD 120,000; compare whether the parameter description names the field and its required status, and observe whether the model still outputs a comparison conclusion when a required parameter is absent.
- Treating tool call termination as automatic summarization. Input is the tool flow after comparison completes; compare the position of the termination node and observe whether tool results are still summarized by the AI.
How to verify the setup
- Input the three source texts and the draft sentence. Compare the draft sentence's claim that the invoice amount agrees with the credit amount against USD 120,000 in source text one and USD 118,000 in source text two. Observe whether the comparison result identifies the disagreement. If the result states agreement, the draft sentence is unsupported.
- Input the three source texts and the draft sentence. Compare the draft sentence's claim that the bill of lading shipment date meets the latest shipment date against the latest shipment date of 15 April 2025 in source text one and the issue date of 12 April 2025 in source text three. Observe whether the comparison result identifies that 12 April 2025 precedes 15 April 2025. If the result does not identify this relation, the draft sentence remains unverified.
- Input the three source texts and a handover request that omits the bill of lading source text. Compare whether the tool call still executes when a required parameter is missing, and observe whether a prompt to supply the missing bill of lading text is returned. If the tool outputs a comparison conclusion while the bill of lading text is absent, that call does not meet the required-parameter constraint.