What the documents look like
After-sales repair and reship work aims to restore a product to use, and it does not close a case by direct refund in the way a refund-only dispute does. In store service and internal training, multi-turn dialogue centers on four material types: repair applications, reship orders, inspection reports, and accessory outbound orders. These materials come from the after-sales system, the order system, repair sites, and the accessory warehouse WMS, and they update per order and per day. The three most time-consuming steps are deciding between repair and reship, coordinating accessories, and tracking customer confirmation. Prompts for this work must state the material scope, the answering task, and how to behave when evidence is missing, so the model does not write in business facts that the records do not carry.
A hypothetical drill sample for this page: one repair application reads, "The user submitted a repair application on March 10, 2025. The product is a rice cooker. The fault description is that it does not power on. The after-sales system status is pending inspection. No inspection report is attached." One draft sentence reads, "The inspection report has confirmed mainboard damage, so a reship can be arranged." The draft sentence treats an inspection report that was not provided as already confirmed, which is an out-of-scope addition.
Constraints at the multi-turn prompts step
Conversation history comes from the session tied to a chatId. A new session and a continued session bring different context into the request. Prompts need to state the material scope, the answering task, and the handling of missing evidence. Question optimization applies to reference resolution and question expansion in continuous knowledge-base dialogue, and whether a short question fits needs checking against the actual conversation. For model and length, check the context and reply ceiling the model supports, and test long documents combined with follow-up questions. Reply format follows the downstream consumer; when json_schema is chosen, the corresponding format requirement must be filled in and the returned structure checked. Retrieval and similarity affect recall ranking only. They do not carry permission or entity isolation, and retrieval itself is not authorization.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Use on this page | How to check |
|---|---|---|
| Memory rounds | Controls how many prior rounds are carried into a repair or reship dialogue, which typically keeps a small number of rounds | Open the session detail and compare the rounds actually carried in historyPreview |
| Reply ceiling | Limits a single reply length so a repair explanation is not cut off | Test a long document with follow-up questions and observe whether truncation occurs early |
| Temperature | Customer service and knowledge-base Q&A favor a lower value | Send the same question repeatedly and compare answer stability |
| Reply format | Choose json_schema when a downstream step reads a fixed structure | Fill in the format requirement, then check whether the returned structure matches |
| Multimodal recognition | Inspection report images and fault photos can serve as input | Confirm the model supports the type before enabling it; the request filters by capability before sending |
| Hide AI output | Used when an internal result is passed to a later node for rewriting | Check whether the final displayed content and the intermediate result are separated |
A hypothetical starting point for this page: set memory rounds to 3, on the reasoning that a repair or reship dialogue usually needs only the most recent rounds of context. The comparison objects are the default value and 6 rounds, and the observation is how carried rounds and answer relevance change.
Three common errors
- Treating "the inspection report has confirmed mainboard damage" in the draft sentence as a verified fact. The sample source text states only a pending inspection status and no attached inspection report. The inspection conclusion is not supported and must remain pending verification.
- Treating a retrieval result or similarity score as a basis for authorization. Retrieval returns candidate content only; it does not judge whether a store staff member is entitled to handle that repair order. Authorization requires a separate system implementation.
- Treating a form configuration returned by an interactive node as already submitted. A form collects values only. After submission, a further request is still needed to continue the workflow, and business verification and database writes require downstream implementation.
How to verify the setup
- Input the sample source text and the draft sentence, then compare whether the draft sentence contains a conclusion such as "has confirmed" that the source text does not state. If the answer turns a pending inspection into a confirmed result, the condition is not met, and the answer should instead state that the inspection report is missing and pending verification.
- Input a follow-up question on the same repair order and compare whether the rounds actually carried in historyPreview match the memory rounds setting. If the carried rounds exceed the setting or are missing, check whether the chatId is consistent and whether this is a new session.
- Input a request containing an inspection report image and compare whether the model supports multimodal input and whether the request filters by capability before sending. If the model does not support image recognition, the image is not sent to the model, and either a model supporting that type must be used or the material must be converted to text.