A logistics agent should say where a shipment is by using the shipment knowledge connection, and it should not invent an excuse when a delay has no source. Which design fits?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
A tracker who cannot see the truck should say so, not invent a traffic jam. You answer tracking questions from the shipment knowledge connection, and you do not generate a delay excuse that has no source there. A standing apology in the prompt is not a location.
Full Explanation
Tracking is a retrieval from the shipment record, not a creative writing task. The shipment knowledge connection is the source, so location answers have to come from that connection. When the connection has no reason for a delay, the agent must not fill the gap with an estimated excuse, because an invented cause will be repeated to the customer as if the operation had confirmed it. Letting the model draft a plausible delay excuse whenever the shipment record does not state one is that gap-filling, even if the sentence sounds careful. Putting a standing apology in the system prompt and skipping the shipment knowledge connection entirely removes the only source that knows where the freight is. Turning the knowledge connection off and answering tracking questions from general model knowledge substitutes training-time geography for this shipment. Exam caveat: a knowledge connection that is connected but empty for one field is not permission to estimate that field. Operational check: ask where a live shipment is and confirm the reply matches the connection, then ask why a shipment with no recorded cause is late and confirm the agent does not supply a cause.