What the documents look like
Brand livestream operations place script, stock and after-sales responsibility on the brand itself, and the resulting promises sit with the brand rather than with an external host. The daily document surface for this category includes livestream scripts, product explanation cards, shift schedules and livestream reviews. Contract and transaction material comparison works across that surface to check subject, object, status and validity range. Data sources listed for the category are Douyin Shop Compass, Juliang Qianchuan, livestream comments and transaction details. Those sources and their per-session or hourly update rhythm affect when a comparison is run; they do not change the boundary of this page.
Tool calls and plugins enter this step to pass source material into model judgement and to keep a checkable trace. Retrieval results and values collected by forms do not constitute authorized execution. The comparison task here is narrow: read the supplied material, read a proposed sentence or handover request, and decide whether each factual claim is supported, unsupported or still pending verification.
Constraints at the tool calls step
A tool introduction tells the model what the tool is for, and it needs to state the input conditions and the situations in which the tool should not be called. System module parameters are fixed, while plugin parameters are configurable, and the two are checked separately. A parameter description is not a guarantee of execution. When a required parameter has no suitable value in context, the model may decline to call the tool; prompt guidance can ask for the missing value, and the actual request is then checked. In advanced orchestration, available tools are connected to the tool call module, and the documented advice is to start with a small number of tools and tune before adding more. The tool call termination node ends the current tool call; it does not call other tools and does not call the AI to summarize tool results.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample. The material text supplied for checking contains three sentences. Sentence one: "Party A is a brand owner and Party B is a supply chain company; on 1 March 2025 the two signed a Livestream Supply Cooperation Contract, agreeing that Party B would supply Party A's brand livestream room from 1 April 2025." Sentence two: "A quotation sheet attached to the contract states a unit price for a certain product, and the quotation is valid until 31 May 2025." Sentence three: "The shift schedule shows that on the evening of 10 April 2025, host A would present that product." The proposed sentence to be judged is: "Party B completed the April 2025 supply as agreed in the contract, and the quotation validity period covers the supply period." This request touches three fact types: contract signing, quotation validity and completion of supply. The material does not state an actual supply record or acceptance status.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Hypothetical starting point for this exercise | Reason and comparison object |
|---|---|---|
| Tool introduction | States that input is contract source text and a proposed sentence, and output is a sentence-by-sentence comparison conclusion | Compared with the source material scope to confirm the introduction stays inside the comparison task |
| Plugin parameters | Parameter descriptions name the required fields as source text, proposed sentence and comparison dimension | Compared with the three sample sentences to confirm fields cover subject, object, status and validity range |
| Required parameter | Source text is treated as a required parameter | Compared with a missing-parameter case; when source text is absent the tool is not called and the gap is recorded |
| Tool connection | Only the contract comparison plugin is connected | Compared with a multi-tool arrangement; a small number of tools is tuned first |
| Tool call termination | Placed after the comparison plugin | Compared with continuing to an AI summary; after termination no summary is produced |
| Custom tool variable | Variable description is the comparison dimension list | Compared with plugin parameters to confirm no duplicate occupation of tool parameters |
Three common errors
- Treating quotation validity as the supply period. Sample sentence two states only that the quotation is valid until 31 May 2025, and sentence three states only a scheduled presentation. The material does not state actual supply or acceptance. The check inputs the sample source text and the proposed sentence, compares whether "quotation validity" and "completed supply" are the same field, and observes that they are different fields, so that part of the proposed sentence is unsupported.
- Treating contract signing as contract effectiveness or completed supply. Sample sentence one states only a signing date and an agreed start-of-supply date; it does not state effectiveness conditions or performance records. The check inputs sentence one and the proposed sentence, compares whether "signed" and "completed supply" are the same fact, and observes that they are different facts, so the proposed conclusion remains pending verification.
- Treating a retrieval hit as authorized execution. Retrieval and relevance do not handle permission or entity isolation, and a matched document does not equal operational authorization. The check inputs the proposed request and the source text, compares whether the authorization basis required by the request is stated in the source, and observes that no authorization clause is stated, so the gap is kept.
How to verify the setup
- For sample sentence one and the proposed clause "Party B completed the April 2025 supply as agreed in the contract," input the contract source text, the proposed sentence and the comparison dimension, compare whether "signed with an agreed start-of-supply date" and "completed supply" are the same field, and observe that they are different fields. The condition is met when the output keeps the gap and marks the claim as pending verification.
- For sample sentence two and the proposed clause "the quotation validity period covers the supply period," input the quotation sheet text and the proposed sentence, compare whether "quotation valid until 31 May 2025" and "supply period" are the same field, and observe that quotation validity does not express a supply period. The condition is met when the output separates the two fields and keeps the unstated part as unstated.
- For the proposed sentence as a whole, input the source text, the proposed sentence and the authorization basis field, compare whether the source states completion of supply and a basis for authorized execution, and observe that the source states neither. The condition is met when the output records the evidence gaps and does not describe a retrieval hit or a form value as authorized execution.