What the documents look like
Pinduoduo low-price campaign operations revolve around activity resource slots, campaign inventory, and refund-rate fluctuation. The daily working materials for this category are campaign registration forms, product cost calculation sheets, after-sales refund slips, and platform in-site messages. In store service and internal training, these materials become the source content for follow-up dialogue: staff ask a sequence of questions to reconcile the campaign price, the inventory position, and the refund wording. Material updates occur daily or once per campaign. The dialogue design only needs to keep one campaign's material versions consistent; no batch synchronization mechanism is derived from that cadence.
The four document types carry different states. A registration form records that a product was entered into a campaign at a stated price on a stated date. A cost sheet records a per-unit cost. A refund slip records a refund event and its current status. An in-site message records platform-side communication. These are distinct fields, and a registration is not a completed sale, while a refund under processing is not a completed refund.
Constraints at the multi-turn prompts step
Multi-turn dialogue depends on memory turns and context length. If memory turns are too few, an earlier campaign price or inventory wording cannot be cited by a later follow-up. If memory turns are too many, unrelated materials are pulled in. The prompt must state the material scope, the answering task, and how to handle missing evidence, so the model does not write business facts that the materials do not contain.
When a conversation continues, the system retrieves the session from the database by chatId and uses only the last element of the messages array as the user question; the remaining messages are ignored. Handover material therefore has to be placed inside that last message. Retrieval and similarity scores do not perform authorization or entity isolation, and a form collects values rather than verifying, approving, writing to a database, or synchronizing externally.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample: the material text states that the campaign registration form records a product entered into a campaign at a campaign price of 9.9 yuan, with a registration date of March 1; the product cost calculation sheet records a per-unit cost of 8.5 yuan for that product; the after-sales refund slip records that on March 2 a refund was accepted and its status is processing. The proposed draft sentence is: "The product was sold at 9.9 yuan in the campaign and the refund was completed." This sentence treats a registration state as a completed sale and a processing state as completed, which exceeds the material scope.
Configuration and implementation checks
The table below is a hypothetical starting point for this exercise, used to compare dialogue behavior under different settings. It is not an official default.
| Configuration item | Hypothetical starting point for this exercise | Comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| Memory turns | Set to 3 turns | Compare with 1 turn and 6 turns to see whether a follow-up can cite the registration form content |
| Reply limit | Enabled at a medium length | Compare with the disabled state to see whether the answer is truncated |
| Temperature | Set low | Compare with a higher value to see whether campaign wording answers stay stable |
| Reply format | Keep default | Consider json_schema only when a downstream node needs to read a fixed structure, and fill in the corresponding format requirement |
| Multimodal recognition | Decide by model capability | When the model does not support it, the option is not shown; do not force it on |
| Hide AI output | Off | Observe intermediate content during debugging, then decide for production use |
Three common errors
- Treating a registration state as a completed sale state. Input is the registration form text above; compare the "registration" field with the "sale" field. If the draft sentence writes "sold", the statement exceeds what the material supports.
- Writing a refund "processing" state as "completed". Input is the after-sales refund slip text above; compare the status field value. If the reply writes "completed", it does not match the source text.
- Treating a historical message as the new question when continuing a session. Input is a request with the same chatId; compare which user question actually takes effect. If an older message is treated as this round's question, the answering target is wrong.
How to verify the setup
- Input the material text and the draft sentence above; compare whether the reply preserves the original "registration" and "processing" states. If the reply rewrites them as sold or completed, the condition is not met.
- Input two requests with the same chatId; compare whether the second request actually uses the last message as the user question. If an earlier message is referenced, the condition is not met.
- Input a follow-up that lacks cost data; compare whether the reply explicitly states that the material does not provide it. If a cost number is written in, the condition is not met. All of the above are paper checks and were not actually run; when a retrieval result is empty or does not match, record the actual observation without inferring a system error or an automatic business action.