What the documents look like
Douyin storefront shelf operations centre on product cards and the store experience score. The working materials named in the brief are product qualification pages, experience score breakdowns, shipping violation appeals and store announcements. These materials update daily or per order, and the operating review task needs qualification validity dates, experience score deduction items, appeal status and announcement wording checked in one view. The tool call and plugin step connects those materials to a workflow and triggers the relevant system module or plugin, letting the model decide from material content which tool to call.
Two features of this category shape the task. The review does not follow a single live-stream rhythm, so the evidence base is document-based rather than session-based. The materials also carry different status fields: a qualification page has an expiry date and an upload state, an experience score breakdown has a period and a deduction value, and an appeal has a submission time and a review state. A draft sentence that merges these fields can look consistent while resting on a status the material does not support.
Constraints at the tool calls step
A tool consists of a tool introduction and tool parameters. The introduction tells the model what the tool does. Parameters carry a parameter description and a required flag. When no suitable required parameter exists in context, the model may not call the tool, and a prompt can guide the user to supply the parameter. When a tool has no required parameter, the model may fabricate one, so the actual request needs checking on the result side. In advanced orchestration, available tools are connected to the tool call module, and the documented advice is to start with a small number of tools and tune before adding more. The tool call termination node ends the current call, so no further tool runs and the AI does not summarise the tool result.
Hypothetical paper exercise. A Douyin merchant reviews June 2025 operating reports. The supplied material text reads: "Product qualification page: subject is a named store, object is a summer women's garment, qualification expiry date is 31 August 2025, status is uploaded." "Experience score breakdown: period is 1 June 2025 to 30 June 2025, deduction item is shipping delay, deduction value is 0.5." "Shipping violation appeal: appeal ticket status is pending review, submission time is 20 June 2025." The draft sentence to be judged is: "The store's June experience score was deducted for shipping delay, and the appeal has been approved." Checking subject, period and field shows the appeal ticket status is pending review, so the phrase "has been approved" is not supported by the material.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Hypothetical starting point for this exercise | How to check and compare |
|---|---|---|
| Tool introduction | States "query experience score breakdown" and the situations where the tool should not be called | Compare against subject and period fields in the material |
| Tool parameters | Parameter description reads "store subject, statistical period" | Check whether each is required and record when a parameter is absent |
| Required parameter | Store subject set as required | Observe whether the tool is called when the subject is missing |
| Tool connection | Only the experience score query and announcement query tools are connected | Add tools only after tuning a small set |
| Tool call termination | Placed after the experience score query | Observe whether the AI summary still runs |
| Custom variable | Adds an "announcement date" description for the announcement query | Check whether the actual request carries that parameter |
The starting values are set for this paper exercise to compare a request with a missing parameter against one with the parameter supplied. They are not official defaults.
Three common errors
- Treating a parameter description as a guarantee of execution. A parameter description only describes the parameter, and the actual request needs separate checking. Check: input "store subject, statistical period" from the exercise, compare the tool parameter description with the actual request fields, and observe whether an undeclared parameter appears.
- Treating a pending appeal as approved. In the exercise the appeal ticket status is pending review, while the draft sentence says "has been approved." Check: input the appeal ticket status field, compare "pending review" with "approved," and observe whether the two values are mutually exclusive.
- Treating retrieval or a form as authorised execution. A tool call does not create authorisation. Check: input the draft sentence and the material scope, compare whether the material states an authorisation or an effective status, and observe whether a missing statement is recorded as pending verification.
How to verify the setup
- Verification one. Input the exercise text "Experience score breakdown: period is 1 June 2025 to 30 June 2025, deduction item is shipping delay, deduction value is 0.5." Compare the draft sentence "the June experience score was deducted for shipping delay" against the material fields. The sentence is supported when subject, period and deduction item agree.
- Verification two. Input the appeal ticket status "pending review." Compare the draft sentence "the appeal has been approved." The sentence is not supported when the status field does not match "approved," and the item stays pending verification.
- Verification three. Input the tool parameters "store subject, statistical period." Compare the actual request fields. Observe whether the tool is not called when a required parameter is missing and whether it is called once the parameter is supplied, and record the actual observation without presuming an outcome. An empty result can be checked against a paper input of [] to inspect downstream design, without claiming that a fictional rule search necessarily returns [].
Verification four. Input the tool introduction text and the connected tool list. Compare the stated "should not be called" situations against the tools actually connected. Observe whether a tool outside the stated scope appears in the connection set, and record the connection set as the observed value.
Verification five. Input the tool call termination placement after the experience score query. Compare the node order against the documented behaviour that termination ends the call and stops the AI summary. Observe whether a summary step still appears downstream, and record the observed order rather than asserting a result.
Across these checks, keep the same subject, the same period and the same field. A contradiction requires mutually exclusive values within one field. A status that is not stated, or evidence that shows only a related stage, is unsupported or pending verification. A pending review does not show that an operating permission is absent. A similarity score does not act as a category, entity or permission filter, and retrieval does not grant authorisation. Where a check needs a value the material does not contain, record the gap and leave it open.