What the documents look like
Supplier onboarding settlement for supermarkets draws on ERP purchasing, supplier portals, POS sales, and finance systems. Purchase contracts, delivery acceptance notes, rebate agreements, and reconciliation statements form the core documents checked day to day. Compared with concession counters in hypermarkets, supplier onboarding settlement is more often purchase-sale or consignment accounts payable, and does not necessarily involve on-site operating staff. That difference shapes operations permissions and handover management: purchasing, supplier business, and finance settlement roles see different field scopes on the same reconciliation statement, so a handover requires confirming readable, operable, and approvable boundaries for each role separately.
During upgrades, the reference relationships among purchase contracts, delivery acceptance notes, rebate agreements, and reconciliation statements need to stay consistent. The V4.17.2 upgrade notes list two manually triggered scripts: the historical chunk training task migration and the knowledge base rebuild status migration. Neither blocks service startup, and both require confirming that all old-version FastGPT App and Pro instances in the cluster have fully stopped and that old task leases have expired before execution. The constraint for operations permissions and handover management at this step is that retrieval results or form submissions must not be treated as completed authorization during an upgrade. A pending-review state does not demonstrate the absence of operating permission. Signing, reaching cooperation, and contract effectiveness are three distinct facts.
Constraints at the upgrades step
A clearly labelled hypothetical paper exercise follows. It is not a real record.
Source text one: "Party A, a supermarket, and Party B, a supplier, signed an Onboarding Purchase Contract on 1 March 2026, agreeing to monthly settlement within 30 days, with rebates settled after quarterly reconciliation."
Source text two: "Delivery acceptance note number DN-20260415-007, dated April 2026, accepted quantity 120 cases, acceptance signature field blank."
Proposed draft sentence to assess: "Party B completed all onboarding settlement obligations in April 2026, and Party A should pay the rebate in that month."
The fields needed for this determination are: contract signing date, settlement term agreement, rebate settlement cycle, and acceptance note signature status. Source text two does not state an acceptance signer, so the claim of "completed all onboarding settlement obligations" lacks acceptance confirmation evidence and remains unsupported. It is not a denial or a conflict.
Configuration and implementation checks
The table below lists only settings or implementation check items already documented in the official material that relate to this page's primary task. The values are hypothetical starting points for this exercise, not official defaults.
| Check item | Hypothetical starting point for this exercise | Reason for the choice and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| AIPROXYAPIENDPOINT | Assume an internal AI Proxy root address | Official material states not to enter a single-model address and not to append a chat interface path; compare against the Plugin service address format in the deployment template |
| AIPROXYAPITOKEN | Assume a non-empty administrator token | Official material states it must match the server configuration and cannot be empty; compare character by character against the AI Proxy server configuration value |
| FILETOKENKEY | Assume a random strong key of at least 6 characters | Official material marks it as required at runtime; compare against example values to confirm no example value is used |
| AES256SECRETKEY | Assume a random strong key of at least 6 characters | Official material marks it as required at runtime; compare against example values to confirm no example value is used |
| INVOKETOKENSECRET | Assume a random strong key of at least 32 characters | Official material marks it as required at runtime; compare against example values to confirm no example value is used |
| SYNC_INDEX | Assume it stays true | Official material states that when disabled, indexes must be maintained manually; compare against the pre-upgrade actual value to confirm no passive change during upgrade |
Three common errors
- Treating a pending-review state as missing operating permission. In the hypothetical exercise, the acceptance note signature field is blank. If the draft sentence infers from this that the supplier lacks onboarding settlement permission, that treats an unstated field as negative evidence. The correct step is to check for an explicit mutually exclusive value on the same field; an unstated field is recorded as an evidence gap.
- Treating a retrieval result as authorized execution. Finding purchase contract text in a supplier portal or knowledge base does not mean the current role has obtained approval or payment permission for that contract. Retrieval is information access; authorization requires a separate explicit source.
- Conflating signing, reaching cooperation, and contract effectiveness. In the hypothetical exercise, the contract signing date is 1 March 2026. The draft sentence moves directly to a rebate payment obligation, skipping the quarterly reconciliation step agreed in the rebate arrangement. The three facts need to be checked separately.
How to verify the setup
- Input source text one and source text two from the hypothetical exercise, and compare whether the acceptance note signature field states a signer and a signing date. Only when both fields have values that correspond to delivery acceptance note number DN-20260415-007 can the acceptance step be considered complete. If the signature field is blank, record it as unsupported rather than as a denial.
- Input the proposed draft sentence, and compare whether its claim of "completed all onboarding settlement obligations" refers to the same field and the same period as the settlement term and rebate settlement cycle stated in source text one. If the period in the draft sentence does not match the quarterly reconciliation cycle agreed in the contract, the sentence does not hold. If it matches, the acceptance note signature status still needs to be checked.
- Input the contract signing date of 1 March 2026 and the monthly settlement term of 30 days from the hypothetical exercise, and compare whether the rebate payment obligation is triggered by quarterly reconciliation after contract effectiveness. If the material does not state the rebate agreement signing date and effectiveness conditions, record it as an evidence gap. Do not supply authorization or effectiveness clauses to obtain a definite answer.