What the documents look like
Presale group-buy collection reverses the usual order of commerce: orders arrive first, and procurement plus fulfillment are organized afterward. This sequence shapes what conversation logs can carry. The logs record system calls and returned values, while the business state lives in the presale product table, the collection result, the procurement plan, and the cutoff notice. Small-program orders, supplier stock, group-leader feedback, and warehouse routing change across the day and across each session. An operations handover has to confirm, for one session at one point in time, which orders belong to it, whether the cutoff has been issued, whether procurement has been placed, and whether the picking wave has been scheduled. A log entry that a call occurred does not by itself show that any of those business states changed.
Constraints at the conversation logs step
Conversation identity is checked against the target conversation and the related business record through chatId. Sessions from different entry points are not merged into one count. When run details are needed, detail is set according to the official contract and responseData is inspected. With detail=true, module status and the complete result are held in responseData, and in stream mode the distinction is carried through event. Field meaning follows what the interface actually returns. Business data that was not returned cannot be treated as fully retained. Identity fields in a test mode may differ from a formal call, so input, history, and returned content are checked separately for each. Reconciliation, retention, and compliance requirements are handled by a complete business plan; the presence of a log does not by itself complete a compliance audit.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample. The material text reads: "Presale product table P-0417, session 3, cutoff time 2025-04-17 20:00, collection result 214 orders, procurement plan status is pending review." It also reads: "The cutoff notice has been issued; warehouse routing has not started." The proposed handover sentence to be judged is: "Procurement for this session has been placed; the picking wave can be handed over." Comparing that sentence with the source text: the procurement plan status is pending review, and the source does not state that placement was completed, so the proposed sentence is unsupported.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Item | Setting or check relevant to this page | How to check and the boundary |
|---|---|---|
| Conversation identity | Correspondence between chatId and the target business session | Compare chatId against the session record one by one; do not merge sessions from different entry points |
| Run details | Read responseData when detail=true | Inspect module status and complete-result fields; record any field that is not returned as unknown |
| Session history | Retrieve records by appId and chatId | Check dataId against conversation content and confirm whether the source is api or the page |
| Feedback field | loadCustomFeedbacks controls reading | Enable it when needed; do not treat feedback as a business approval |
| Handover request | Field-by-field comparison of the proposed sentence with the source text | A judgment requires matching status, object, and period; keep any gap as a gap |
| Numeric starting point | The 214 orders for this session is a hypothetical trial starting value | Compare it with the value in the collection-result document; this is not an official default |
Three common errors
- Treating pending review as placed procurement. The input is the procurement plan status "pending review"; the comparison object is "placement completed" in the proposed handover sentence; the observable result is that the two status fields do not match, so the judgment is unsupported.
- Merging sessions from different entry points. The input is records from two chatIds; the comparison object is order attribution for the same session; the observable result is that different session sources have been combined into one count, so they must be checked separately.
- Using retrieval results in place of authorization. The input is a quote list returned by retrieval; the comparison object is the authorization state of the handover request; the observable result is that a quote exists while no approval field is present, so the item is pending verification.
How to verify the setup
- Take the hypothetical source text and the proposed handover sentence, and list subject, object, status, and period field by field. Compare the procurement plan status with the statement in the proposed sentence. A judgment of consistency is made only when the status fields match and the period is the same; otherwise the item is recorded as unsupported.
- Take session records from two different chatIds and compare their appId, chatId, and session attribution. Observe whether they have been merged into one count. If the sources differ, list them separately and do not perform a cross-entry total.
- Take one return with detail=true and inspect the module status and complete-result fields in responseData against the source text. Record business data that was not returned as unknown, and do not assume it was retained.