The user wants a detailed analysis and professional report, over 1000 characters long, based on the search query “時事脈搏 – 六人阿城鵝肉用膳後食物中毒”.
The report should be in traditional Chinese, follow a specific structure (engaging opening, titled sections, logical progression, strong conclusion), use a compelling and accessible language style, and incorporate factual information from the search results. It should also adhere to specific formatting rules (Markdown, no English, no opening large title, no greetings/closings).
Here’s a plan:
Perform the search: Use the query “時事脈搏 – 六人阿城鵝肉用膳後食物中毒” to gather information.
Analyze search results: Identify key facts: number of people affected, the restaurant name, the event (food poisoning after eating), potential symptoms, any investigation details, dates, etc.
Structure the report:
* Engaging Opening: Start with a hook about food safety and a recent incident. (Set a small title)
* Body Paragraphs with Titles:
* Detail the incident: What happened? Where? Who was affected? (Set a small title, e.g., 事件始末)
* Describe the symptoms and timeline if available. (Set a small title, e.g., 不適症狀與影響)
* Discuss potential causes (based on typical food poisoning, though specific cause might not be in snippet). Mention investigation efforts. (Set a small title, e.g., 原因探究與應對)
* Broader implications: Food safety concerns, restaurant responsibilities, public health actions. (Set a small title, e.g., 食安警鐘再響)
* Concluding Section: Summarize the incident’s importance, emphasize the need for vigilance, and leave a lasting impression. (Set a small title, e.g., 謹記教訓，守護食安)
Draft the content: Write in traditional Chinese, maintaining the specified tone and length (aiming for >1000 characters). Incorporate facts from the search results naturally. Avoid jargon.
Refine and Edit: Ensure logical flow, clear language, correct formatting (Markdown, no English, no large title, specific titles for sections), and check character count. Remove any greetings or unnecessary phrases. Ensure citations are correctly placed if using direct information from search results (though given the prompt restrictions on output format and the nature of the request, it might be safer to synthesize and describe the *facts* found rather than quoting directly to avoid complex citation requirements *in the final output*). The prompt asks to *incorporate* factual information, not necessarily cite each sentence in the output format described for internal tool use. Given the constraint “不要在文末附上來源或參考資料”, and the instruction to “直接提供簡潔、準確、完整的答案，僅包含與問題直接相關的內容，不添加任何無關表達或語氣修飾”, the safest approach is to synthesize the information without explicit citation markers in the final text provided to the user.
