What the documents look like
Import and export permit handling happens before declaration and determines whether a shipment may lawfully cross the border. In store service and internal training, staff rely on the commerce authority system, customs commodity codes, supplier materials and customer statements of use to judge the regulatory document requirements for automatic import licences, dual-use item licences, contracts and product descriptions. These materials are refreshed per shipment and arrive from scattered sources. Errors can prevent customs clearance, breach a contract or attract an administrative penalty. Citation tracing requires every conclusion to return to specific source wording and to record the authorization state of that material.
The knowledge base search node outputs references as an array, and the length may be zero. An empty array does not mean the workflow has errored or stopped. The reference cap is controlled in tokens. The minimum relevance value is a 0-1 filter threshold that takes effect only under semantic retrieval or result reranking. A relevance score does not perform entity isolation or permission filtering, and retrieval itself is not authorization. When several knowledge bases are associated, they must share the same vector model before they can be linked together. For different models, verify the identifier first, exclude the non-matching base and record what was observed. Do not run a cross-model retrieval to compare missed recalls.
Assumed paper exercise sample: a store training material states in its original wording, "The applicant for an automatic import licence is the domestic consignee, and the contract and product statement of use must be submitted with the application. A dual-use item licence requires a statement of use issued by the end user." A draft sentence awaiting review reads, "This shipment has obtained the automatic import licence and shipping may be arranged." The source wording only describes the applicant and the documents to submit. It does not state that this shipment has obtained the licence or that shipping conditions are met. The draft sentence is unsupported and the evidence gap must be recorded.
Constraints at the citation tracing step
The search node returns references as an array whose length may be zero, so downstream design must accept an empty result without treating it as a failure. The reference cap limits how many tokens of content are cited per search. The minimum relevance value filters low-relevance results only under semantic retrieval or reranking, and it is a threshold rather than a final ordering rule. After question optimization, hybrid retrieval, image retrieval or reranking, results may be merged from several recall paths and need not follow a single vector similarity order.
Similarity scores and retrieval scope do not decide whether a staff member is authorized to see a record or whether a supplier belongs to a permitted entity. Those are separate business checks. The same-vector-model requirement applies only to associating knowledge bases inside this search node. It does not extend to commerce authority websites or other external systems. Where the source wording does not state a system error or an automatic business action, none may be asserted.
The material identity matters at this step. Automatic import licences, dual-use item licences, contracts and product descriptions each carry different subjects, objects and validity scopes. A conclusion drawn from one document type cannot be transferred to another without matching the subject, the period and the same field. Only mutually exclusive values in the same field for the same subject and period count as a contradiction. Unstated facts, or evidence that covers only a related stage, remain unsupported or pending verification.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Assumed starting value for this exercise | Reason and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| Associated knowledge bases | Only the permit materials base using the same vector model | Check the vector model identifier and exclude bases on different models |
| Search mode | Hybrid retrieval | Compare recall coverage against semantic retrieval alone |
| Reference cap | Set to 3000 tokens | Assumed starting value for this exercise; compare truncation against 1500 |
| Minimum relevance | Set to 0.3 | Assumed starting value for this exercise; compare filtered entries against 0.5 |
| Question optimization | Enabled | Compare recall on follow-up questions against the disabled state |
| Result reranking | ReRank enabled | Compare ordering changes against the unranked result |
These values are exercise starting points chosen for comparison, not documented defaults. The reference cap is a citation limit in tokens and is separate from any thinking budget setting. RRF is a merge process applied to results from several recall paths. It is not a switch to be turned on. Image retrieval requires image input and a model with the corresponding capability, and reranking requires a rerank model that is enabled by configuration. The optional paths shown in the overall retrieval flow are not all executed on every request.
Three common errors
- Treating the token value of the reference cap as a thinking budget. The input is the reference cap field; the comparison object is a reasoning effort or thinking budget setting; the observable result is whether the two values have been mixed up.
- Reading the minimum relevance value as a permission or entity filter. The input is the relevance threshold; the comparison object is the authorization state field; the observable result is whether low-scoring records are excluded as unauthorized records.
- Treating an empty reference array as a workflow failure. The input is a paper output of []; the comparison object is the downstream node design; the observable result is whether the downstream path continues on the empty array.
How to verify the setup
- Input the assumed sample source wording and the draft sentence; compare whether the draft contains expressions such as "has obtained" or "shipping may be arranged" that the source does not state; the observable result is that the draft is marked unsupported and the evidence gap is retained.
- Input two knowledge base identifiers using the same vector model; compare their vector model fields; the observable result is that matching identifiers permit joint association, while mismatched ones are excluded and recorded.
- Input a paper empty array []; compare the design of the downstream answering step; the observable result is that the downstream step does not treat the empty array as an error termination and does not fabricate reference content.
These checks describe expected observations and do not claim that any test has been run. Where a record is pending review, that does not show a lack of operating authority. Signing, reaching cooperation and contract effectiveness are three separate facts. A quotation validity period does not indicate a supply period. Materials needed for verification must sit within a target retrieval scope the reviewer may access, or within a clearly identified manual input. Where they are absent, record the gap.