What the documents look like
Permit handling occurs before customs declaration and determines whether a shipment may lawfully be imported or exported. The core materials for this category are the automatic import licence, the dual-use item licence, the contract, and the product description. Data sources include the commerce authority system, customs commodity codes, supplier materials, and the customer's statement of use. Updates are irregular and can occur per shipment, so each consignment may generate new licence status and new use descriptions.
Operating reports and exception reviews work from these materials. Tool calls and plugins add value here by connecting information-retrieval actions across licence determination, use-description preparation, and approval-status follow-up into a workflow that leaves checkable results. Three configuration elements decide whether the model calls the correct tool at the correct moment and whether report data is collected completely: the tool introduction, the tool parameters, and which parameters are required.
Constraints at the tool calls step
Tool calls rely on the model deciding whether to execute, based on the tool introduction and the parameter descriptions. Parameters for system modules are already fixed; parameters for plugins are configurable. When a required parameter is missing, the model may not call the tool, and interaction may be needed to prompt for the missing value. The tool call termination node ends the current call, stops further tool calls, and stops the AI from summarising tool results. In advanced orchestration, available tools must be connected to the tool call module, and the documented guidance is to tune a small number of tools first.
Hypothetical paper exercise: a trade compliance role processes one automatic import licence application in March 2025. The materials on hand contain a contract stating that the buyer is Company A, the seller is Company B, the goods are a specified equipment model, and the contract signing date is 10 February 2025. A product description states that the equipment is used for industrial inspection and does not state the end user. The draft sentence under review is: "This automatic import licence application has received approval from the commerce authority." The question is whether that draft sentence is consistent with the available materials.
The constraint this exercise illustrates: the tool introduction must state the input conditions and the situations in which the tool should not be called. When a required parameter is absent, the model cannot be assumed to call the tool. Retrieval results do not constitute authorisation, and values collected by a form require downstream business verification and approval actions before an approval fact exists.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Use on this page | How to check |
|---|---|---|
| Tool introduction | State that the tool queries licence processing status, with the input condition that a contract and product description are already available | Read the introduction text and confirm it contains the input condition and the situations where calling is inappropriate |
| Tool parameters | In the plugin parameters, set two fields: licence type and application number | Compare the parameter descriptions and the required markers |
| Required parameter | Set the application number as required, and complete it through interaction when absent | Observe whether the model declines to call the tool when the application number is missing |
| Tool connection | Connect the licence status query tool to the tool call module | Confirm that a diamond marker appears at the tool head after connection |
| Tool call termination | Place a termination node after the status query tool to end the current call | Confirm that no further tool calls and no AI summary follow the termination node |
| Custom tool variable | Add a variable description for the product description node to extend tool input | Compare the variable description against the node's actual output |
Hypothetical trial starting point: the application number is set as a required parameter because the specific licence record cannot be located without that number. The comparison object is the situation where the parameter is not required and the model may fabricate a value. This starting point is a paper exercise setting for this page and is not an official default value.
Three common errors
- Writing the tool introduction as a generic description without stating input conditions or situations where calling is inappropriate. The model may then call the tool when no contract or product description exists, producing licence status records in the report that have no supporting basis. Check: read the tool introduction text, compare whether it contains the input condition and the inappropriate-call situations, and observe whether the model still calls when those materials are absent.
- Leaving a required parameter empty or marking it as not required, so the model may fabricate a parameter value. Check: in the exercise sample, remove the application number, observe whether the model calls the tool, and compare the parameter value passed at call time against the materials actually available.
- Treating retrieval results or form entries as an authorisation or approval fact. In the sample, the draft sentence claims approval has been received, while the materials contain only a contract and a product description and state no approval status. Check: compare the draft sentence against the source materials and confirm whether an approving body, approval date, and approval scope are present; when absent, record the item as pending verification.
How to verify the setup
- Verification one: input the contract and product description text from the sample and compare whether the tool introduction states the input condition. If the introduction contains "a contract and product description are required" and the model calls the tool when the materials are complete, the condition is met. If the model still calls when the materials are missing, record the result as not met.
- Verification two: input the sample materials with the application number removed and compare whether the model calls the tool. If the model does not call and instead requests the application number through interaction, the condition is met. If the model fabricates an application number and calls the tool, record the result as not met.
- Verification three: input the draft sentence and the source materials, and compare the phrase "has received approval" against whether an approval record exists in the materials. If no approving body, approval date, or approval scope appears in the materials, the draft sentence is unsupported and is recorded as pending verification. If a record exists with the same subject, the same period, and the same field, the approval scope must still be checked against whether it covers this shipment. Retrieval results and form values do not constitute an approval fact; approval requires downstream business verification and approval actions to be completed.