What the documents look like
Platform refund and return handling happens order by order, not in a single concentrated after-sales event. The materials are scattered across the platform after-sales backend, customer service chat, WMS receiving records, and payment refund records. In store service and internal training, multi-turn dialogue has to work with four document types: refund applications, return logistics notes, inspection photos, and refund approvals. New records appear per order and per day.
Each document has a different subject, object, status, and validity scope. A refund application records the buyer's request. A return logistics note records in-transit status. An inspection photo records the condition of goods on arrival. A refund approval records an amount and a handling result. When a multi-turn prompt treats the status of one document as the conclusion of another stage, the training or service reply can contradict the materials.
The most time-consuming steps are judging return responsibility, chasing the returned parcel, and approving the refund amount. The consequences of error include platform intervention, consumer complaints, and loss of the payment amount.
Constraints at the multi-turn prompts step
The prompt must state the document scope, the answering task, and how to handle missing evidence, so the model does not invent business facts. History records must be checked for the context actually carried in, distinguishing a new session from a continued session. When continuous knowledge-base dialogue is needed, check referent resolution and question expansion; do not assume every short question fits. Model and length settings must be checked against the model's supported context and reply settings, testing long documents combined with follow-up questions. Reply format follows what the downstream stage consumes; when json_schema is selected, fill in the corresponding format requirement and verify the returned structure.
Hypothetical drill sample for checking. The source text to be compared consists of three sentences. First: "Refund application R-2024-0512, buyer submitted a return and refund for order A on 12 May, reason given as goods not as described." Second: "Return logistics note L-2024-0518, carrier picked up on 18 May, current status in transit." Third: "Inspection photo Q-2024-0520, photographs the appearance of the arrived goods, no inspection conclusion attached." The draft sentence to be judged is: "This order has completed return inspection and can be refunded immediately." According to the materials, the logistics note is in transit and the inspection photo carries no conclusion. The draft sentence lacks two items of evidence, return receipt and inspection conclusion, and is unsupported.
Configuration and implementation checks
The table below gives hypothetical trial starting points for this page, used to check settings related to the primary task. These are not official default values.
| Configuration item | Hypothetical starting point for this trial | Reason for the choice and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| Memory turns | Keep a small number of history turns | Customer service and knowledge-base question answering; compare whether follow-up questions carry in earlier refund application information |
| Reply cap | Limit to a shorter reply | Store replies need to be brief; compare truncation position with information completeness |
| Temperature | Set lower | Rules are explicit; compare whether two replies to the same question stay consistent |
| Reply format | Keep default | No downstream need to read a fixed structure; compare whether the returned structure is stable |
| Multimodal recognition | Enable image recognition according to model capability | Inspection photos need recognition; compare whether unsupported types are filtered out |
| Thinking configuration | Default | Question complexity is ordinary; compare whether switching produces an error |
Three common errors
- Treating the in-transit status of a return logistics note as delivered, and concluding the return is complete. The check input is the logistics note text; compare the status field against the value "delivered"; observe whether the reply describes in transit as delivered.
- Treating the existence of an inspection photo as an inspection conclusion. The check input is the photo description text; compare whether a conclusion field is stated; observe whether the reply claims inspection is complete.
- Treating "can be refunded immediately" in the draft sentence as an executed refund. The check input is the draft sentence and the refund approval material; compare whether a completed approval record exists; observe whether the reply describes the draft as already refunded.
How to verify the setup
- Input the three source sentences of the hypothetical sample and the draft sentence. Compare whether the draft sentence contains return receipt and inspection conclusion. Observe whether the reply points out that both items of evidence are missing and keeps the status as pending verification. The condition is met when the reply names both missing items and does not assert completion.
- Input the logistics note text. Compare the value of the status field. Observe whether the reply describes in transit as delivered. The condition is met when the reply keeps the in-transit description.
- Input the draft sentence and the refund approval material. Compare whether a completed approval record exists. Observe whether the reply describes the draft as already refunded. The condition is met when the reply distinguishes the draft from an executed action.
Retrieval is not authorization. Similarity scores do not filter by category, entity, or permission, and a knowledge-base search does not by itself grant access to a record. Forms collect values; business verification, approval, database writes, and external synchronization require their stated downstream implementation. Where a material does not state a field, that field remains unknown, and a pending request is not approval.