What the documents look like
Creator-led sales campaigns rest on external creator performance and commission settlement. Brand commerce staff, MCN agencies and creator managers work across four document types: creator cooperation agreements, commission setting forms, sample shipment forms and livestream performance reports. These materials carry the cooperation terms, the commission basis, sample ownership and per-session results, and their fields do not align by default. A comparison task asks whether the same subject, the same period and the same field hold consistent values.
Sources named for this category include the selected alliance, the Juliang Xingtu platform, creator historical data and store transaction details, with updates per session or per week. Tool calls and plugins let the model decide from context whether to invoke a module or plugin that reads and compares materials, then pass the result to later nodes. A tool description states the purpose and the situations where the tool should not be invoked, and the model uses that description to judge timing.
Constraints at the tool calls step
A tool consists of a description and parameters. System module parameters are fixed; plugin parameters are configurable. Each parameter carries a parameter description and a required flag. When a suitable required parameter is absent, the model may decline to invoke the tool, and interaction can be used to prompt for the missing value, with the actual request checked afterwards. A tool without required parameters may be invoked even when the context holds no suitable parameter, and the model sometimes fabricates one.
In advanced orchestration, available tools are connected to the tool calls module. A connected tool separates tool input from ordinary input, and its description can be edited to sharpen invocation timing. The documentation recommends starting with a small number of tools before tuning further. A tool call termination node attached after a tool ends that invocation, stops further tool calls and stops the AI from summarising tool results. Custom tool variables extend variable input for nodes not treated as tool parameters, so a tool call can reach that node and the workflow after it.
Retrieval results and relevance scores do not carry permission or entity isolation. Libraries built on different vector models cannot be associated together; identifiers are checked first and non-matching items excluded. Optional paths shown in the overall flow diagram do not mean every request executes all of them.
Hypothetical paper exercise. Material text supplied for comparison: the creator cooperation agreement states "Party A: Xinghe Culture Communication (fictional); Party B: creator Lin (fictional); cooperation session: 18 June 2025 feature session; commission rate: 20%; settlement basis is actual transaction amount less refunds." The commission setting form states "session 18 June 2025; commission rate 20%; settlement basis: actual transaction amount." The sample shipment form states "shipment date 10 June 2025; two samples; purpose: feature session display." Draft sentence to be judged: "The commission for this feature session is settled at 20%, and the samples belong to the creator." The question is whether that sentence matches the materials.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Use on this page | How to check |
|---|---|---|
| Tool description | States that the tool reads and compares the cooperation agreement, commission setting form, sample shipment form and livestream report | Inspect whether the description names input conditions and situations where invocation should not occur |
| Tool parameters | Plugin parameters are configurable; system module parameters are fixed | Check whether required parameters cover subject, session and field name |
| Required flag | Marks the parameters needed to locate materials | When a suitable required parameter is absent, record the non-invocation and complete the value through interaction |
| Tool connection | Connects material-reading tools to the tool calls module | Start with few tools, confirm input separation and that the description is editable |
| Tool call termination | Attached after a material-reading tool to end this invocation | Confirm that no further tool call or AI summary follows termination |
| Custom tool variables | Adds parameter descriptions for nodes that cannot serve as tool parameters | Check that the parameter description matches the actual request |
Hypothetical starting point for this exercise: set the required parameters to "session date plus subject name", because both materials in the sample distinguish records by session date and subject, and the comparison object is the commission rate field for the same session. This starting point is a choice for this exercise, not an official default.
Three common errors
- Treating "commission rate 20%" on the commission setting form as an already effective settlement basis. The setting form is a configuration document; whether settlement was executed still requires the actual transaction details and refund deductions, and the setting form alone does not show settlement completion.
- Treating the draft sentence "the samples belong to the creator" as stated in the materials. The sample shipment form records only shipment date, quantity and purpose, and does not record sample ownership, so the sentence is unsupported.
- Reading tool call termination as still returning an AI summary afterwards. The documentation states that the termination node ends this invocation and no longer calls the AI to summarise tool results.
Corresponding executable checks: input the commission setting form and transaction details, compare the settlement basis wording, and observe whether both share subject, period and field; input the sample shipment form and the draft sentence, compare whether an ownership field is recorded, and observe that ownership is missing; input the termination node position, compare whether tools or AI summary nodes follow it, and observe whether later calls exist.
How to verify the setup
- Check one: input the cooperation agreement and the commission setting form from the hypothetical sample, compare the "commission rate" field, and expect both to read 20% for the same subject and session. The condition is met when the field values agree; if one side lacks the field, record it as unsupported.
- Check two: input the sample shipment form and the draft sentence "the samples belong to the creator", compare the ownership field, and expect the shipment form to record no ownership. The condition is met when the added content in the draft has no corresponding value in the materials, and the evidence gap is recorded.
- Check three: input the tool call termination node and its downstream connections, compare whether other tools or AI summary nodes follow termination, and expect no later calls. The condition is met when the flow ends after termination. These are paper expectations and were not executed.
If retrieval returns an empty result, a downstream design can be checked against the explicit paper input [] without claiming that a fictional rule search necessarily returns []. A pending review state does not show that an operation permission is missing; signature, cooperation reached and contract effectiveness are three distinct facts; a quotation validity period does not indicate a supply period.