What the documents look like
Creator-led sales campaigns depend on external creator fulfilment and commission settlement rather than internal brand scheduling. The working papers are creator cooperation agreements, commission setting forms, sample shipment forms, and live session reports. Each paper carries a different fact. An agreement shows cooperation intent and signature status. A commission setting form records the settlement basis and its review state. A sample shipment form reflects physical handover. A live session report presents one session's results. These materials update on different rhythms; some appear per session, some are summarised weekly. Operations handover must establish, for the same fact, who filled it in, who confirmed it, and what state it currently holds.
Constraints at the citation tracing step
The knowledge base search node can associate one or more knowledge bases that share the same vector model, and it outputs a citation array whose length may be zero. Citation content must be traced item by item back to source text before it can support a handover judgement. Retrieval itself does not constitute authorisation, and a value collected on a form does not equal business confirmation. The figure on a commission setting form, the signature status in an agreement, and the receipt record on a sample shipment form each require their own downstream implementation for verification, approval, and writing.
Hypothetical drill sample. Material one, creator cooperation agreement text: "Party A and Party B reached cooperation intent for a creator-led sales session; the agreement text has been exchanged by the contacts of both sides; as of this record date no sealed signature page from either side has been seen." Material two, commission setting form text: "This form records a commission rate of fifteen percent; the submitter marked it as pending review by the business lead." The draft sentence to be judged: "The commission rate for this session is confirmed and can be used as the settlement basis." This draft sentence writes a pending-review state as confirmed and treats cooperation intent as a settlement basis, with signature and review evidence absent.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Hypothetical trial starting point for this page | Reason for the choice and comparison object |
|---|---|---|
| Associated knowledge bases | Select the knowledge base holding the creator cooperation agreement and the commission setting form under the same vector model | Compare the vector model identifier with another knowledge base; when identifiers differ, do not associate them together |
| Search mode | Hybrid retrieval | Compare recall scope with semantic retrieval used alone; numbered fields need full-text hits |
| Citation upper limit | Set a small tokens value for this trial | Compare against a larger display amount to observe whether trimming affects source completeness |
| Minimum relevance | Set a middle value for this trial | Compare against results with filtering off to observe whether low-relevance fragments are excluded |
| Result rerank | Enabled | Compare ordering against the unranked case when candidates are numerous |
| Question optimisation | Enabled | Compare against the disabled case to observe whether a short question's retrieval terms change |
These values are hypothetical trial starting points, not official defaults. The citation upper limit uses the tokens unit. Thinking budget belongs to model thinking configuration and is unrelated here.
Three common errors
- Treating a pending-review commission setting form as a confirmed settlement basis. The input is the commission setting form text above. The error is ignoring the "pending review by the business lead" state field and reading a filled value as an effective value. The check compares the draft sentence against the source state field; when no completed review record appears in the source, the condition "confirmed" is not satisfied.
- Treating cooperation intent as an effective contract. The input is the agreement text above. The error is reading "reached cooperation intent" and "exchanged text" as completed signature. The check compares whether a sealed signature page record appears in the source; when it does not appear, the signature fact is unsupported.
- Treating retrieval output as authorised execution. The input is the citation array. The error is assuming that retrieving a commission setting form means settlement authority exists. The check compares the retrieval action record against the approval action record; the two belong to different stages, and retrieval results do not contain an authorisation state.
How to verify the setup
- Input the agreement text and the draft sentence above. Compare "cooperation confirmed" in the draft sentence against "reached cooperation intent, no sealed signature page seen" in the source. When the source contains no completed signature field, the draft sentence is unsupported and the evidence gap must be recorded.
- Input the commission setting form text and the draft sentence above. Compare "confirmed" against "pending review". When the source review state has not been updated to complete, the settlement basis does not hold and the conclusion remains pending verification.
- Input a paper citation array
[]to the downstream answer stage. Compare whether the downstream design carries the empty array through and gives a no-citation notice. This input is hypothetically constructed to check the receiving logic; it does not mean a real retrieval necessarily returns an empty array.
Knowledge bases with different vector models cannot be associated together. During checking, compare the vector model identifier first and exclude those that do not match. Retrieval and relevance do not carry permission or entity isolation functions; business approval and data writing require separate system implementations.