Why generic content fails here
A model composing an answer has a great deal of generic material available already. It quotes a source when that source supplies something the others do not: a number, a constraint, a named procedure, a dated outcome. A page that only restates what the category already says gives it no reason to reach for you.
What counts as a fact
Something checkable. Delivery time in days. Price with what it includes. Capacity with the conditions under which it holds. A certification with its issuing body and number. A customer outcome with the period it covers.
What does not count: "industry-leading", "fast response", "专业团队". These are not false so much as unusable - there is nothing in them to quote.
Where the facts come from
Mostly from people, not documents. Delivery leads know the real timelines; support knows the actual failure modes; finance knows what the price includes. Interview them and write the answers down. The marketing material is usually the last place to look, because it has already had the specifics filtered out.
Every entry needs a source and a date
Facts expire. A delivery time from two years ago that is no longer true will be quoted back at you by a model that found it, and correcting it afterwards is far harder than keeping it current. Record who supplied each fact and when it was last confirmed, and review anything older than a year.
Keep it separate from the writing
The fact base is an asset in its own right, not a draft. Stored separately it can feed a web page, a placement, a sales deck and an FAQ without being rewritten each time - and when a number changes, there is one place to change it.