What the documents look like
Presale group buying collects orders first and organizes procurement and fulfillment afterward. Orders, supplier inventory, group-leader feedback and warehouse routing jointly determine the operating result. For operating reports and exception reviews, the working documents are the presale product table, the group-order result, the procurement plan and the cut-off notice. These documents update daily and per session, so the state before and after cut-off within one session can differ.
Tool calls and plugins at this step let the model decide from context whether to read a given document type or request a given system module, which supports reconciliation and summarization during a review. A tool description states the purpose, the input conditions and the situations where the tool should not be called. The parameter description and the required flag together affect whether the model issues a call.
A hypothetical drill sample: a platform operator reviews an exception for the "5 jin lychee pack" presale session on 10 June 2025. The presale product table reads "5 jin lychee pack, presale cut-off 10 June 20:00, supplier A can supply 200 units." The group-order result reads "260 units collected by 20:00 cut-off." The procurement plan reads "procure 200 units, gap of 60 units pending confirmation." The draft sentence to be assessed is "this session completed procurement of 260 units." The reconciliation scope covers these three documents only, with no real customer and no legitimate identity number.
Constraints at the tool calls step
Tool calling depends on the tool description, the parameter description and the required flag. When a suitable required parameter is absent, the model may not call the tool, and a prompt can guide the user to supply the parameter. System module parameters are fixed, while plugin parameters are configurable, and the two are checked separately. In advanced orchestration, available tools are connected to the tool call module, and a small number of tools is recommended for tuning first. The tool call termination node ends the current tool call and stops the AI from summarizing the tool result. Custom variables extend tool inputs so that nodes not treated as tool parameters can also be called.
Retrieval results do not carry authorization duties, and a relevance score does not constitute a permission or entity boundary. Libraries built on different vector models cannot be associated together; identifiers are checked and non-matching items are excluded. A relevance score is not a category, entity or permission filter, and it does not exclude unrelated businesses or unauthorized records. Forms collect values, while business verification, approval, database writes and external synchronization require their stated downstream implementation.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Hypothetical starting point for this trial | Reason and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| Tool description | State "read the presale product table, group-order result and procurement plan" | The description must include input conditions and non-call situations; compare item by item against the source document names |
| Tool parameters | Session date, product name, cut-off time | System module parameters are fixed and plugin parameters are configurable; check whether the sample fields are covered |
| Required parameters | Session date and product name set as required | Without a suitable required parameter the model may not call; inspect the request against the sample fields |
| Tool connection | Connect only tools that read the three document types above | Fewer tools ease tuning; check whether connection points map to the tool call module |
| Tool call termination | Attach the termination node after summarization completes | After termination the AI summary is not called again; check whether output stops at the summary result |
| Custom variable | Add a "cut-off status" variable | Extends inputs not treated as tool parameters; check the variable description against the actual request |
Three common errors
- Treating the 260 units in the group-order result as completed procurement. The procurement plan states only "procure 200 units, gap of 60 units pending confirmation," so the draft sentence "completed procurement of 260 units" disagrees with the source. The check inputs the three source documents and the draft sentence, compares the procurement quantity field, and records the draft as unsupported when its quantity exceeds the procurement plan quantity.
- Treating the tool description as a guarantee of execution. The description states purpose only, while the parameter description and required flag affect the call. The check inputs the tool description and parameter configuration, compares whether required parameters are complete, and records a possible non-call when the session date is missing.
- Treating retrieval relevance as a permission filter. Relevance does not exclude unrelated businesses or unauthorized records. The check inputs the retrieval scope and returned records, compares record identifiers against the authorized scope, and records a gap when a record falls outside that scope, without inferring automatic system interception.
How to verify the setup
- Input the three source documents and the draft sentence "this session completed procurement of 260 units." Compare the procurement quantity in the draft with the quantity in the procurement plan. When the draft quantity exceeds the plan quantity, record it as unsupported and retain the 60-unit gap as pending confirmation.
- Input the sample session date 10 June 2025 and the product name "5 jin lychee pack." Compare whether the tool request contains both required parameters. When either parameter is missing, record a possible non-call, complete it through interaction, and then check the actual request.
- Input the tool call termination node configuration and the summary output. Compare whether AI summary content still appears after termination. When the output stops at the summary result with no further summary, the termination node behavior matches the expectation. All of the above are paper checks, and no actual test is claimed.