What the documents look like
Cross-border return refurbishment and resale handles reverse logistics and item condition, which differs from first-leg replenishment at an overseas warehouse. The main data comes from the overseas warehouse WMS, the TikTok return center, Amazon return reports, and item inspection photos. Daily documents include the return inspection form, the refurbishment record, the scrap form, and the relisting checklist. Data updates daily and per batch.
For contract and transaction material comparison, the work is to check whether the return inspection form, the refurbishment record, the scrap form, and the relisting checklist agree on the same subject, object, status, and validity scope. Citation tracing requires that every conclusion can be traced back to specific source text in those materials.
Constraints at the citation tracing step
The knowledge base search node can associate one or more knowledge bases that share the same vector model, and it outputs cited content as an array whose length may be zero. An empty array means the search path completed; it does not mean the workflow reported an error and stopped. Search results still need to be passed to the answering step, where the answer is checked line by line against the cited source text. The minimum relevance value is a filtering threshold and does not perform permission or entity isolation. The same-vector-model requirement only constrains which knowledge bases can be associated together; it does not extend to business registration sites or other external systems. Hybrid search merges multiple result paths through RRF, reranking requires a model and must be enabled in settings, and image retrieval requires image input and the corresponding model capability. The citation limit is measured in tokens, and the thinking budget belongs to model thinking configuration, unrelated to the citation token limit.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample: a cross-border seller's after-sales supervisor receives a return inspection form whose source text reads "March 10, 2025, batch B-0310, item A, inspection conclusion: refurbishable, relist after refurbishment." A separate scrap form reads "March 10, 2025, batch B-0310, item A, conclusion: scrap." The draft sentence to be judged is "Batch B-0310 item A has completed refurbishment and relisting; the scrap form does not apply." The two materials give mutually exclusive statuses for the same batch and item, and the draft sentence does not state the scrap form's conditions of applicability, so the draft sentence is unsupported.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Check item | Documented setting or implementation check | Relation to the sample |
|---|---|---|
| Associated knowledge bases | Select one or more knowledge bases with the same vector model | The return inspection form and the scrap form must sit in knowledge bases with the same vector model to be associated together |
| Cited content output | Array format, length may be zero | When checking the draft sentence, confirm whether the citation array contains the source text of both materials |
| Minimum relevance | A 0-1 value, effective only in semantic search or with reranking | This threshold does not exclude materials with mutually exclusive statuses such as the scrap form; manual comparison is required |
| Search mode | Semantic search, full-text search, or hybrid search | Batch number B-0310 is an exact identifier, so full-text or hybrid search is suitable |
| Citation limit | Each search cites at most n tokens | For this exercise the starting value is set to cover the source text of both materials, compared against the empty-array case |
| Result reranking | Requires a ReRank model and must be enabled in settings | The rerank score is used for filtering and does not replace manual checking of mutually exclusive statuses |
Three common errors
- Treating a search hit as authorization or business confirmation. Error: because the search returned the return inspection form, the refurbishment and relisting are judged approved. Check: input the draft sentence and the source text of both materials, compare subject, batch, item, and status fields, and observe whether the same field holds mutually exclusive values; if there is only a search hit and no approval record, the result remains to be verified.
- Treating an empty citation array as a workflow failure. Error: when the search output is [], the path is judged interrupted. Check: use an explicit paper input of [] to check the downstream design and observe whether the downstream step accepts the empty array; the document states the length may be zero and the path completes, so an error cannot be asserted.
- Treating minimum relevance as a permission or entity filter. Error: raising the threshold is expected to exclude unrelated materials such as the scrap form. Check: input two materials containing mutually exclusive statuses, compare cited content before and after filtering, and observe whether the threshold only trims by relevance; permission and entity isolation require separate system implementation.
How to verify the setup
- Input the source text of the return inspection form and the scrap form from the hypothetical sample, compare the status fields for the same batch B-0310, the same item A, and the same date March 10, 2025, and observe whether "refurbishable" and "scrap" appear as mutually exclusive values; if the draft sentence does not state the conditions of applicability, judge it unsupported.
- Input an explicit paper empty array [], compare whether the downstream answering step accepts the empty citation, and observe whether an error or interruption appears; the document states the length may be zero and the path completes, so a claim that a fictional rule search must return [] cannot be made.
- Input the draft sentence "Batch B-0310 item A has completed refurbishment and relisting; the scrap form does not apply," compare the subject, object, status, and validity scope of the draft sentence against the source text of both materials, and observe whether the draft sentence adds conditions of applicability not stated in the source text; missing evidence stays pending verification, and no authorization or effective clause is fabricated.