What the documents look like
Semi-managed sellers on Temu maintain overseas inventory and dispatch rather than only supplying goods to the platform. Their working material comes from Temu Seller Center, overseas warehouse WMS, logistics tracking and procurement cost sheets. The documents handled day to day include product declaration sheets, overseas inventory sheets, price declarations and platform fulfilment orders. These materials are read and checked across languages, so model connection and configuration determine whether retrieval returns readable content against the correct fields. The brief records that updates happen daily and per order. This page does not derive batch synchronization, full synchronization, real-time behaviour or transaction-triggered mechanisms from that frequency.
Constraints at the model connections step
FastGPT connects to model providers through AI Proxy. The App and Admin services must each set AIPROXY_API_ENDPOINT and a non-empty AIPROXY_API_TOKEN; if either is missing, startup validation fails. The system requires at least one language model and one index model. Retrieval association requires the same embedding model: knowledge bases built on different embedding models cannot be associated together, so the practical step is to check identifiers and exclude non-matching bases rather than run a cross-model search to compare recall. A relevance score does not carry permission or entity-isolation duties, and retrieval itself does not constitute authorization.
Hypothetical paper exercise. The source material contains three sentences. First, the product declaration sheet records the entity "cross-border supplier A", the object "folding storage rack", the status "draft", and the date range "1 March 2026 to 31 March 2026". Second, the overseas inventory sheet records the same entity and object, the status "confirmed", the quantity "120 units", and the warehouse "US West Coast warehouse". Third, the price declaration records the same entity and object, the status "pending review", and the quotation validity date "30 April 2026". The draft sentence to be judged is: "Supplier A's folding storage rack supply period runs to 30 April 2026." The judgement must hold entity, period and field constant. Quotation validity and supply period are different fields, so this draft sentence is not supported.
Configuration and implementation checks
The table below is a hypothetical starting point for paper comparison only. The values are not official defaults.
| Configuration item | Hypothetical starting value | Reason and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| AIPROXYAPIENDPOINT | Assume http://aiproxy:3000 | The document requires the service root address without /v1; compare the entered string for extra path segments |
| AIPROXYAPITOKEN | Assume a non-empty administrator token | The document requires a non-empty value consistent with the server side; compare the two values for equality |
| Language model and index model | Assume one of each is enabled | The document requires at least one of each; compare the enabled list against both types |
| Embedding model identifier | Assume all bases use the same embedding model | The document requires the same embedding model for association; compare identifiers across bases |
| Model probe interval | Assume 30 minutes | The document supports integers from 5 to 60 minutes; compare the entered value against that range |
| Alert Webhook address | Assume left empty | The document marks this item optional; when empty no push occurs, so compare whether it is configured |
Three common errors
- Treating quotation validity as the supply period. The input is the price declaration field "quotation validity 30 April 2026". Compare the field name and meaning against the draft sentence. The observable result should record two different fields and mark the draft sentence unsupported.
- Treating pending review as granted authorization. The input is the price declaration status "pending review". Compare whether a completed review record exists. The observable result should remain pending verification; a pending request is not an approval.
- Treating a retrieval hit as a permission grant. The input is a declaration fragment returned by one search. Compare the entity that owns the fragment against the requesting entity. The observable result should record that retrieval produces no authorization conclusion.
How to verify the setup
- Input the hypothetical draft sentence together with the three source sentences. Compare entity, object, period and field. The observable result should be that the sentence is unsupported, with quotation validity and supply period recorded separately.
- Input the overseas inventory sheet values "confirmed, 120 units" and the product declaration sheet value "draft". Compare the values of the same field. The observable result should be that the status field values differ, while the quantity field is stated in the inventory sheet.
- Input a retrieval request with no matching material. Compare the returned result against the expected empty set. The observable result should be empty or unmatched. To check downstream handling on paper, use the explicit input
[]and examine how the receiving logic is designed; this does not assert that a real search must return an empty array.
Missing evidence stays missing. Where the documents do not state an error code or an observed outcome, record what to compare and leave the result unknown rather than inventing a deterministic cause.