fix: allow exports with QA warnings

src/app/api/__tests__/jobs.test.ts

@@ -73,7 +73,8 @@ interface CreateJobResponse {
 
 interface OptimizeJobResponse {
   optimizedArticle: { title: string };
-  qaReport: { checks: unknown[] };
+  qaReport: { checks: unknown[]; overall_status?: string };
+  exportPaths?: Record<string, string>;
   timing: TimingResponse;
 }
 
@@ -314,6 +315,65 @@ describe("job API routes", () => {
     expect(llmMocks.generateValidatedJson).toHaveBeenCalled();
   });
 
+  it("still writes export files when the QA report fails", async () => {
+    const { job } = await createJobFixture();
+    await confirmFactCard(
+      request(validFactCard),
+      params<{ jobId: string }>({ jobId: job.id }),
+    );
+
+    llmMocks.generateValidatedJson
+      .mockResolvedValueOnce({
+        title: "API LLM Optimized GEO Article!!!",
+        summary:
+          "A official site article for Marketing teams about GEO optimization.",
+        body_markdown:
+          "Example has 12 years of GEO optimization experience and 99 patents.",
+        image_suggestions: [],
+        changed_sections: ["title", "body"],
+        requires_user_confirmation: [],
+      })
+      .mockResolvedValueOnce({ checks: [] })
+      .mockResolvedValueOnce({
+        title: "API LLM Optimized GEO Article",
+        summary:
+          "A official site article for Marketing teams about GEO optimization.",
+        body_markdown:
+          "Example has 12 years of GEO optimization experience and 99 patents.",
+        image_suggestions: [],
+        changed_sections: ["body"],
+        requires_user_confirmation: [],
+      })
+      .mockResolvedValueOnce({ checks: [] })
+      .mockResolvedValueOnce({
+        title: "API LLM Optimized GEO Article",
+        summary:
+          "A official site article for Marketing teams about GEO optimization.",
+        body_markdown:
+          "Example has 12 years of GEO optimization experience and 99 patents.",
+        image_suggestions: [],
+        changed_sections: ["body"],
+        requires_user_confirmation: [],
+      })
+      .mockResolvedValueOnce({ checks: [] });
+
+    const response = await optimizeJob(
+      request({}),
+      params<{ jobId: string }>({ jobId: job.id }),
+    );
+    const body = (await response.json()) as OptimizeJobResponse;
+
+    expect(response.status).toBe(200);
+    expect(body.qaReport.overall_status).toBe("fail");
+    expect(body.exportPaths).toEqual(
+      expect.objectContaining({
+        markdown: expect.stringContaining("optimized.md"),
+        docx: expect.stringContaining("optimized.docx"),
+        qaJson: expect.stringContaining("qa_report.json"),
+      }),
+    );
+  });
+
   it("returns a clear error when LLM optimization fails", async () => {
     const { job } = await createJobFixture();
     await confirmFactCard(

src/app/api/jobs/[jobId]/optimize/route.ts

@@ -61,16 +61,13 @@ export async function POST(request: Request, context: RouteContext) {
       result.qaReport,
     );
     const exportStore = getExportStoreFromRuntime();
-    const exportPaths =
+    const exportPaths = await exportStore.writeJobExports({
-      qaReport.overall_status === "fail"
+      jobId,
-        ? {}
+      article: optimizedArticle,
-        : await exportStore.writeJobExports({
+      qaReport,
-            jobId,
+    });
-            article: optimizedArticle,
-            qaReport,
-          });
     await repository.updateArticleJob(jobId, {
-      status: qaReport.overall_status === "fail" ? "qa_failed" : "optimized",
+      status: "optimized",
       export_paths: exportPaths,
     });
 

src/app/page.tsx

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 "use client";
 
-import { useEffect, useMemo, useState } from "react";
+import { useEffect, useState } from "react";
 
 import {
   ArticleInputForm,
@@ -89,10 +89,6 @@ export default function Home() {
   const [lastTiming, setLastTiming] = useState<TimingSummary | null>(null);
   const [liveProgress, setLiveProgress] = useState<WorkflowProgress | null>(null);
 
-  const exportBlocked = useMemo(
-    () => qaReport?.overall_status === "fail",
-    [qaReport],
-  );
   const canOptimize =
     Boolean(jobId) && Boolean(factCard) && factCard?.uncertain_items.length === 0;
 
@@ -209,7 +205,7 @@ export default function Home() {
         : "";
       setMessage(
         body.qaReport.overall_status === "fail"
-          ? `质检发现硬性失败，已阻止导出。${timingText}`
+          ? `质检发现需要复核的问题，已保留导出文件。${timingText}`
           : `优化完成。${timingText}`,
       );
     } catch (error) {
@@ -267,7 +263,6 @@ export default function Home() {
         />
         <OptimizedPreview
           article={optimizedArticle}
-          exportBlocked={exportBlocked}
           jobId={jobId}
         />
         <QaReportPanel report={qaReport} />

src/components/optimized-preview.tsx

@@ -5,7 +5,6 @@ import type { OptimizedArticle } from "../lib/domain/types";
 interface OptimizedPreviewProps {
   article: OptimizedArticle | null;
   jobId: string | null;
-  exportBlocked: boolean;
 }
 
 const exportFiles = ["optimized.md", "optimized.docx", "qa_report.json"];
@@ -13,7 +12,6 @@ const exportFiles = ["optimized.md", "optimized.docx", "qa_report.json"];
 export function OptimizedPreview({
   article,
   jobId,
-  exportBlocked,
 }: OptimizedPreviewProps) {
   if (!article) {
     return (
@@ -63,7 +61,7 @@ export function OptimizedPreview({
       )}
       <div className="export-row">
         {exportFiles.map((fileName) =>
-          jobId && !exportBlocked ? (
+          jobId ? (
             <a
               className="download-link"
               href={`/api/jobs/${jobId}/exports/${fileName}`}

src/lib/workflow/__tests__/llm-integration.test.ts

@@ -319,4 +319,41 @@ describe("LLM workflow integration", () => {
     expect(platformCheck?.status).toBe("warn");
     expect(report.overall_status).not.toBe("fail");
   });
+
+  it("does not let LLM escalate hallucination risk to a hard failure", async () => {
+    llmMocks.generateValidatedJson.mockResolvedValueOnce({
+      checks: [
+        {
+          rule_id: "hallucination_risk",
+          status: "fail",
+          evidence: "LLM wants strict fact confirmation.",
+          reason: "This should remain a warning for user review.",
+          suggested_fix: "Review manually.",
+          target_agent: "body",
+        },
+      ],
+    });
+
+    const report = await inspectQualityWithLlm({
+      article: {
+        title: "Example GEO Optimization Guide",
+        summary:
+          "Example Technology Co., Ltd. mentions a 99-day rollout plan for Marketing teams.",
+        body_markdown:
+          "Example Technology Co., Ltd. has 8 years of GEO optimization experience.",
+        image_suggestions: [],
+        changed_sections: [],
+        requires_user_confirmation: [],
+      },
+      factCard: confirmedFactCard,
+      platform: "official_site",
+      sourceImages: [],
+    });
+
+    const hallucinationCheck = report.checks.find(
+      (check) => check.rule_id === "hallucination_risk",
+    );
+    expect(hallucinationCheck?.status).toBe("warn");
+    expect(report.overall_status).toBe("warn");
+  });
 });

src/lib/workflow/__tests__/workflow.test.ts

@@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ describe("workflow nodes", () => {
     expect(report.checks[0]?.evidence).not.toContain("Article");
   });
 
-  it("hard-fails incomplete company names, hallucinated numbers, and conflicting years while warning on industry drift", () => {
+  it("hard-fails incomplete company names and conflicting years while warning on industry drift and hallucination risk", () => {
     const report = inspectQuality({
       article: {
         title: "Example Wins Finance Automation Market!!!",
@@ -112,7 +112,6 @@ describe("workflow nodes", () => {
     expect(failures.map((check) => check.rule_id)).toEqual(
       expect.arrayContaining([
         "company_name_integrity",
-        "hallucination_risk",
         "claim_consistency",
       ]),
     );
@@ -120,6 +119,10 @@ describe("workflow nodes", () => {
       (check) => check.rule_id === "industry_alignment",
     );
     expect(industryCheck?.status).toBe("warn");
+    const hallucinationCheck = report.checks.find(
+      (check) => check.rule_id === "hallucination_risk",
+    );
+    expect(hallucinationCheck?.status).toBe("warn");
     expect(report.overall_status).toBe("fail");
   });
 

src/lib/workflow/quality-inspector.ts

@@ -31,7 +31,6 @@ const REQUIRED_RULES: QualityRuleId[] = [
 
 const HARD_FAILURE_RULES = new Set<QualityRuleId>([
   "company_name_integrity",
-  "hallucination_risk",
   "claim_consistency",
 ]);
 
@@ -213,14 +212,14 @@ function inspectRule(
     const unsupportedNumber = findUnsupportedNumbers(combined, factCard).length > 0;
     return check(
       ruleId,
-      unsupportedNumber || article.requires_user_confirmation.length > 0 ? "fail" : "pass",
+      unsupportedNumber || article.requires_user_confirmation.length > 0 ? "warn" : "pass",
       unsupportedNumber
         ? findUnsupportedNumbers(combined, factCard).join(", ")
         : "未发现未确认的数字类事实主张。",
       unsupportedNumber
-        ? "数字类主张无法追溯到已确认事实卡。"
+        ? "发现需要人工复核的数字类事实主张。"
         : "事实主张可以追溯到已确认事实卡。",
-      "删除未确认主张，或先补充到事实卡并确认。",
+      "建议人工复核，必要时删除未确认主张，或补充到事实卡后再确认。",
       unsupportedNumber ? "body" : null,
     );
   }