What the documents look like
Ordinary platform refunds occur continuously by order and do not necessarily connect to a single livestream commitment. Cross-border material and multilingual retrieval therefore handles refund applications, return waybills, quality inspection photos and refund approvals generated one order at a time. These materials may be written in different languages and arrive from the platform after-sales backend, customer service chat, WMS receiving and payment refund records. Material updates occur per order and daily, and retrieval needs arise with each order. The model connection and configuration step must let a language model and an index model read these materials and perform cross-language retrieval, while retrieval results remain information rather than an authorization conclusion.
Constraints at the model connections step
From V4.17.0, AI Proxy is a required dependency. The App and any Admin service that reuses App/Service configuration must set AIPROXY_API_ENDPOINT and a non-empty AIPROXY_API_TOKEN; missing either item causes startup validation to fail. Legacy OpenAI environment variables or a single-model custom request address cannot replace these two settings. AIPROXY_API_ENDPOINT holds the AI Proxy service root address and must not append /v1. AIPROXY_API_TOKEN must match the server-side configuration and must not be empty; an application API key does not substitute for it.
The system requires at least one language model and one index model to operate normally. In channel configuration, model mapping maps the model FastGPT requests to the upstream actual model; the proxy address holds a BaseUrl, with attention to whether /v1 is needed. A relevance score does not carry permission or entity isolation, and retrieval itself is not authorization.
Hypothetical exercise sample: a platform after-sales specialist receives one cross-border return, and the source material consists of three sentences. First, the refund application states "Order number A-1001, application date 5 March 2026, refund reason: item does not match description, application status is pending review." Second, the return waybill states "Waybill number SF-7788, receiving warehouse: Shenzhen bonded warehouse, signed date 8 March 2026." Third, the quality inspection photo note states "Photo number QC-03, capture date 9 March 2026, inspection conclusion: appearance intact, function pending retest." The draft sentence to be judged is: "This order has completed the return and the refund has been approved." In this sample the refund application status is pending review, the waybill shows a signature, and the inspection conclusion is function pending retest. The draft sentence claims a completed return and an approved refund, which does not match the pending-review status and pending-retest conclusion recorded in the material.
Configuration and implementation checks
The table below is a paper implementation check for this page; the trial starting values are not official defaults.
| Configuration item | Hypothetical trial starting value and reason | Comparison method and observed object |
|---|---|---|
AIPROXY_API_ENDPOINT | Enter the AI Proxy service root address without appending /v1, because the documented format is a root address | Compare against the documented root-address format and confirm no path suffix is appended |
AIPROXY_API_TOKEN | Enter a non-empty administrator token consistent with the server side, because a missing or mismatched token fails startup validation | Compare against the server-side configuration and confirm it is non-empty and consistent |
| Language model | Enable one language model for text dialogue, because the system requires at least one language model | Confirm in the model provider page that it is enabled and that the model test passes |
| Index model | Enable one index model for text chunk indexing, because the system requires at least one index model | Confirm in the model provider page that it is enabled and that the model test passes |
| Model mapping | Configure the mapping relation for the models the sample needs, because FastGPT requests a model that must resolve to the upstream actual model | Compare the model FastGPT requests with the upstream actual model and check whether they correspond |
| Model capability | Check model capability against the input the sample needs, because multimodal input and tool calling are separate capabilities | Verify multimodal and tool calling separately; do not assume a same-named parameter overrides orchestration |
Three common errors
- Treating a pending-review status as an approval. In the sample the refund application status is "pending review" while the draft sentence states "refund has been approved." The input is the refund application text and the draft sentence; the comparison object is the application status field against the approval wording in the draft sentence; the observable result is whether the two are consistent. Pending review does not demonstrate approval, and it does not demonstrate the absence of operating permission.
- Treating a signature as a completed return. In the sample the waybill shows a signed date and the inspection conclusion is function pending retest. The input is the waybill text and the inspection photo note; the comparison object is the signature fact against the return-completion fact; the observable result is whether the material records return completion. A signature and a completed return are different facts.
- Treating a retrieval hit as authorized execution. The input is the retrieval request and the returned results; the comparison object is the retrieval result against the authorization state; the observable result is whether retrieval produces authorization effect. Retrieval is an information access action; business verification, approval, database writes and external synchronization each require their own downstream implementation.
How to verify the setup
- Use the sample text to check the draft sentence. The input is the refund application text, the return waybill text, the inspection photo note and the draft sentence. The comparison object is the application status field against the approval wording in the draft sentence. The condition is satisfied when the draft sentence matches the status recorded in the material; when the material status is pending review, the draft sentence should not contain approved-refund wording. The expected result is that an inconsistency is found and the evidence gap is recorded.
- Use the sample text to check the return-completion state. The input is the return waybill text and the inspection photo note. The comparison object is the signature fact against the return-completion fact. The condition is satisfied when the material records return completion; when only a signature and a pending-retest conclusion exist, return completion is not supported. The expected result is that the item is recorded as pending verification, without a claim of completion.
- Use an empty-result input to check the downstream design. The input is the paper input
[], and the comparison object is how the downstream flow handles an empty result. Check whether the design distinguishes no-reference from authorization state; only when this branch is unstated is a design gap recorded. Whether an actual query returns[]remains to be tested, and the paper input does not by itself assert a design defect.