What this category's data looks like
Exam organization and violation handling involves three types of materials: exam administration manuals, examination room record sheets, and violation fact records. The exam administration manual is issued by the examination administration department per exam season, with fields including exam name, date, examination room number, violation clauses, and signature field; the examination room record sheet is filled out on site by invigilators, with fields including candidate name, seat number, absence and violation markers, and invigilator signature; the violation fact record is compiled afterward by patrol inspectors or chief examiners, with fields including candidate name, description of the violation behavior, time of occurrence, evidence number, and review signature. The three types of materials have different update rhythms: the manual is revised with examination administration notices, record sheets are submitted per session, and fact records circulate with incidents. When entering the material verification and discrepancy localization function, the exam administration manual serves as the baseline field source, while the examination room record sheets and violation fact records serve as materials to be compared, each providing name, quantity, date, and signature receipt fields for the tool call node to read and return comparison results.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by the tool call node in the workflow (the model decides whether to call it, and the node executes it), outputting the tool call result (the input parameters and return in the call record). The "discrepancy list" is then completed by a subsequent AI node or manual verification. Based on the tool description, parameter descriptions, and whether parameters are required, the model determines whether to call the tool this time; when there are no required parameters, the model may fabricate parameter values on its own, and when there are required parameters but no suitable value in the context, it may not call.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Exam administration manual | Whether the exam name, date, examination room number, and violation clauses are consistent with the record sheet | Open the tool node description field and check whether it states the purpose, when it should be used, and the return result; on the canvas, check the diamond-shaped interface connections and node status, and confirm the call path of toolChoice and functionCall |
| Examination room record sheet | Whether the candidate name, seat number, absence and violation markers, and invigilator signature are complete | Open each parameter configuration one by one and check the two items: parameter description and whether it is required; run a test with a question missing the invigilator signature to see whether it asks a follow-up first instead of fabricating directly |
| Violation fact record | Whether the candidate name, description of the violation behavior, time of occurrence, evidence number, and review signature correspond to the manual clauses | Check the two items: parameter description and whether it is required, and confirm that they correspond to fields that actually exist in the business materials; check whether the return result contains values that do not exist in the business materials |
| Tool call node | Whether the model calls the tool according to the description, and whether the return result corresponds to the material fields | On the canvas, check the diamond-shaped connections and node status, and confirm the call records of toolChoice and functionCall |
Three common errors
- Phenomenon: The name, quantity, and date of the same record do not match between the examination room record sheet and the violation fact record. Cause: The two materials are entered separately, without baseline comparison against the exam administration manual fields.
- Phenomenon: The exam administration manual version is not synchronized, and old violation clauses are still referenced. Cause: After the manual is updated, the tool description and parameter descriptions are not written back, and the model calls according to the old description.
- Phenomenon: The examination room record sheet lacks an invigilator signature, or the violation fact record lacks a review receipt. Cause: The signature field is not set as a required parameter, and the model directly gives an answer when there is no value in the context.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance for this function: run a test with a question missing a required parameter, check the input parameters and return in the call record, and confirm whether it asks a follow-up or calls according to the description; check the call path of toolChoice and functionCall, and verify the two items: parameter description and whether it is required.
Business test: use a real record to find fields inconsistent with the ledger, and verify the name, quantity, date, and signature receipt of the exam administration manual, examination room record sheet, and violation fact record.
- Open the tool node description field and check whether this description can be understood when taken out on its own; open each parameter configuration one by one and verify the two items: description and whether it is required.
- Run a test with a question missing that field to see whether it asks a follow-up first instead of fabricating directly; on the canvas, check the diamond-shaped connections and node status.