File size: 8,134 Bytes
7ff7119 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 | """package_insights_graph β package-level cross-doc analysis in a single LLM call.
Simple 1-LLM-call topology:
START
β generate_insights (1 LLM call with ALL document data, perspective-driven
instructions, RISK_SYSTEM_PROMPT-style anti-hallucination)
END β final_insights key
The ``package_type`` (audit/dd/compliance/general) selects different prompt
instructions β see ``_PACKAGE_TYPE_INSTRUCTIONS`` below.
"""
from __future__ import annotations
import json
from typing import TypedDict
from langchain_core.messages import HumanMessage, SystemMessage
from langgraph.graph import END, START, StateGraph
from pydantic import BaseModel, Field
from graph.states.pipeline_state import PackageInsights, ProcessedDocument
class PackageInsightsState(TypedDict, total=False):
"""The package_insights_graph state."""
documents: list[ProcessedDocument]
package_type: str # audit | dd | compliance | general
final_insights: PackageInsights | None
# 4 detailed perspective instructions
_PACKAGE_TYPE_INSTRUCTIONS = {
"audit": (
"Analyze the document package from an audit perspective. Focus on financial "
"anomalies: pricing patterns, signs of over-billing, quantity discrepancies, "
"VAT anomalies, back-dating, payment-term inconsistencies. If the same "
"service or item appears in multiple documents at different prices or "
"quantities, that is a strong audit risk signal."
),
"dd": (
"Analyze the document package from a Due Diligence perspective in the "
"context of a transaction. Focus on: change-of-control clauses, near-term "
"expirations, amendments under NDA, unusually long termination notice, "
"significant percentage price hikes, legal red-flag clauses, "
"disproportionate penalty clauses, warranty obligations."
),
"compliance": (
"Analyze the document package from a compliance perspective. Focus on: "
"GDPR and data-protection clauses present/absent, encryption requirements, "
"incident-handling procedures, audit rights, liability limitations, "
"access controls, data-processor declarations. If the contract handles "
"PERSONAL DATA without proper data-protection language, that is a "
"critical compliance risk."
),
"general": (
"Analyze the document package from a general business audit perspective. "
"Focus on cross-doc patterns: consistency, missing data, anomalies, "
"broken business logic."
),
}
SYSTEM_PROMPT = """You are a package-level audit assistant. You receive multiple
documents at once and look for risks and anomalies that are visible ONLY when
the documents are reviewed TOGETHER β not within a single document.
CRITICAL RULES:
1. Rely ONLY on data that actually appears in the supplied documents. NEVER
fabricate a number, date, name, or field value.
2. If a piece of data is missing from every document, mention it as a fact
("missing data") β do NOT invent a value.
3. Cite specific references: which document, which field, which value you saw.
Do not generalize.
4. Descriptions should be concise but informative: concrete numbers, dates,
names β NOT generic "worth checking" filler.
5. Do not repeat the same observation. One risk = one entry.
6. Write in English, in a natural business tone. Avoid bureaucratic jargon:
"comprehensive", "thorough", "in-depth", "leveraging", "implement",
"going forward", "regulatory requirements".
7. Fill every field: executive_summary (4-6 sentences), findings (list of
structured risks), key_observations (3-7 concise observations)."""
# Pydantic structure for ``with_structured_output()``
class _PackageFinding(BaseModel):
description: str
severity: str = "low" # high | medium | low
rationale: str = ""
affected_documents: list[str] = Field(default_factory=list)
class _PackageInsightsResult(BaseModel):
executive_summary: str = ""
findings: list[_PackageFinding] = Field(default_factory=list)
key_observations: list[str] = Field(default_factory=list)
def _build_documents_summary(documents: list[ProcessedDocument]) -> list[dict]:
"""Compact per-document representation for the LLM.
Strips meta-fields (_quotes, _confidence, _source) to save prompt context.
"""
summary: list[dict] = []
for doc in documents:
if doc.extracted is None or doc.classification is None or doc.ingested is None:
continue
clean_data = {
k: v
for k, v in (doc.extracted.raw or {}).items()
if not k.startswith("_")
}
summary.append({
"file": doc.ingested.file_name,
"type": doc.classification.doc_type_display,
"doc_type": doc.classification.doc_type,
"data": clean_data,
})
return summary
def build_package_insights_graph(*, llm=None, checkpointer=None):
"""Compile the package_insights graph.
Args:
llm: optional BaseChatModel-like Runnable. If provided, one LLM call
produces a cross-doc PackageInsights bound to the
``_PackageInsightsResult`` Pydantic schema. If None, dummy
fallback (empty findings + a basic exec summary).
checkpointer: optional checkpointer.
"""
async def generate_insights_node(state: PackageInsightsState) -> dict:
"""Generate cross-doc analysis in a single LLM call."""
documents = state.get("documents") or []
package_type = state.get("package_type", "general")
if not documents:
return {"final_insights": PackageInsights(
executive_summary="No processed documents are available.",
package_type=package_type,
)}
# No LLM β dummy fallback
if llm is None:
return {"final_insights": PackageInsights(
executive_summary=(
f"{len(documents)} documents in the '{package_type}' package. "
"Package-level AI analysis requires a configured LLM provider (vLLM/Ollama)."
),
package_type=package_type,
)}
documents_summary = _build_documents_summary(documents)
try:
docs_json = json.dumps(documents_summary, ensure_ascii=False, indent=2)
except (TypeError, ValueError):
docs_json = str(documents_summary)
perspective = _PACKAGE_TYPE_INSTRUCTIONS.get(
package_type, _PACKAGE_TYPE_INSTRUCTIONS["general"]
)
prompt = f"""{perspective}
The full data set of the document package is below (each with the extracted fields):
{docs_json}
Return a structured package-level analysis per the schema. Use concrete data
references, not generic phrasing."""
structured_llm = llm.with_structured_output(_PackageInsightsResult)
try:
response: _PackageInsightsResult = await structured_llm.ainvoke([
SystemMessage(content=SYSTEM_PROMPT),
HumanMessage(content=prompt),
])
except Exception as exc:
return {"final_insights": PackageInsights(
executive_summary=(
f"Package-level analysis failed ({type(exc).__name__}). "
f"Try again later or check the LLM endpoint."
),
package_type=package_type,
)}
return {"final_insights": PackageInsights(
executive_summary=response.executive_summary or "",
findings=[f.model_dump() for f in response.findings],
key_observations=list(response.key_observations or []),
package_type=package_type,
)}
graph = StateGraph(PackageInsightsState)
graph.add_node("generate_insights", generate_insights_node)
graph.add_edge(START, "generate_insights")
graph.add_edge("generate_insights", END)
if checkpointer is not None:
return graph.compile(checkpointer=checkpointer)
return graph.compile()
|