What this category's data looks like
Student disciplinary and appeal handling involves three types of materials: disciplinary fact materials, disciplinary decision documents, and appeal statements. The sources are the student affairs system, the academic affairs system, and paper-signed receipts, and the update cadence advances with the disciplinary process nodes, generating one document at a time. The three types of materials play different roles when entering this feature: disciplinary fact materials provide the original behavior records and evidence fields, disciplinary decision documents carry the handling conclusion and effective date, and appeal statements record the objection requests and reasons. Field characteristics are concentrated in names, quantities, dates, signatures, and receipts. The same record often shows inconsistent name spellings, different quantity calibers, and misaligned dates across materials, and unsynchronized versions or missing receipts are also common. After the materials enter the tool calling step, the model first determines whether a tool needs to be called to read fields, and then the subsequent nodes perform discrepancy localization.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by the tool calling node in the workflow (the model decides whether to call, and the node executes), outputting the tool call result (the inputs and returns in the call record). The "discrepancy list" is then completed by subsequent AI nodes or manual verification. Based on the tool description, parameter description, and whether parameters are required, the model determines whether to call the tool this time.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Disciplinary fact materials | Whether the name, quantity, and date are consistent with the disciplinary decision document | Open the tool node description field, check the parameter description and whether required, and run a test query missing the date field to see whether it asks a follow-up question first |
| Disciplinary decision document | Whether signatures and receipts are complete, and whether the date connects with the appeal statement | Check the diamond interface and target tool connection on the canvas, and inspect the input values of toolChoice and functionCall in the call record |
| Appeal statement | Whether the name, quantity, and date of the same record match the ledger | Compare the field values in the call return one by one, mark the fields inconsistent with the ledger, and record the number of array entries |
| Tool calling node | Whether the description, parameter description, and whether required correspond to the material fields | Run a test with a real record and check whether the return result contains values that do not exist in the materials |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The name, quantity, and date of the same record do not match between the disciplinary fact materials and the disciplinary decision document. Cause: The two materials are written by different nodes, the field calibers are not unified, and the call return is directly concatenated.
- Symptom: The appeal statement version is not synchronized and references an old disciplinary decision document. Cause: After the materials are updated, the tool call is not retriggered, and the call record still retains the old inputs.
- Symptom: The disciplinary decision document lacks a signature or receipt, but the call return gives complete fields. Cause: The model fabricates values on its own when there are no required parameters, without asking a follow-up question first.
How to verify the setup
Feature acceptance: Run a test query missing required parameters, check the inputs and returns in the call record, and confirm whether it asks a follow-up question or calls according to the description; also check toolChoice, functionCall, and the connection status of the tool calling node.
Business test: Use a real record to find the field inconsistent with the ledger, and record the difference between the value of that field in the call return and the ledger value.
- Open the tool node description field, check whether this description can be understood on its own, and verify the parameter description and whether required.
- Check the diamond connection and node status on the canvas, run a test query missing a field, and confirm that the return result does not contain values that do not exist in the materials.