What this category's data looks like
This page focuses on three types of materials in the foreign teacher appointment and course scheduling scenario: appointment contracts, work permit materials, and course scheduling tables. Appointment contracts come from the HR department and contain name, position, appointment period, compensation, and signature fields, with updates triggered by renewal or changes; work permit materials come from the foreign affairs and approval process and contain document number, permit period, issue date, and receipt, with versions rolling forward along with approval progress; course scheduling tables come from academic scheduling and contain course name, class, week number, number of class hours, and instructor, updated by semester or schedule adjustment. When these three types of materials enter the tool calling and plugin feature, appointment contracts and work permit materials serve as the verification baseline, and course scheduling tables serve as the object to be compared; the model decides whether to call a tool based on the tool description and parameter description, and outputs the inputs and returns in the call record, for subsequent nodes or manual localization of discrepancies in names, quantities, dates, and signatures.
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 a subsequent AI node or manual verification. The model judges whether to call a tool this time based on the tool description, parameter description, and whether parameters are required; when there are no required parameters, the model may fabricate parameter values on its own, and when there are required parameters but no suitable values in the context, it may not call.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Appointment contract | Check whether the name, position, appointment start and end, and signature field in the contract are consistent with the work permit materials | Open the tool node description field and confirm the description can independently explain the purpose and return; test-run with a question missing a required parameter, and check whether the call record first asks a follow-up question |
| Work permit materials | Check whether the document number, permit period, issue date, and receipt match the appointment contract and course scheduling table | Open each parameter configuration one by one, and check the two items of parameter description and whether required; check the values of toolChoice and functionCall in the call record |
| Course scheduling table | Check whether the course name, class, week number, number of class hours, and instructor are consistent with the appointment contract and work permit materials | Check on the canvas that the diamond interface is connected to the target tool; confirm that toolChoice and functionCall appear in the call record |
| Tool calling node | Check the node connections and node status, and confirm that the inputs and returns in the call record are traceable | Run through with one real record, and compare whether any value appears in the returned result that does not exist in the materials |
Three common errors
- Symptom: the same teacher's name is written differently in the appointment contract and the course scheduling table. Cause: the two materials are entered in different steps, and no field mapping or version synchronization was done.
- Symptom: the permit period in the work permit materials does not match the appointment period in the appointment contract. Cause: after the approval version was updated, it was not written back, and the old version is still in the tool calling context.
- Symptom: the course scheduling table lacks the instructor's signature or receipt. Cause: after scheduling adjustment, no supplementary signature was made, and the signature field was not checked as a required parameter during tool calling.
How to verify the setup
Feature acceptance: test-run with a question missing a required parameter, check the inputs and returns in the call record, confirm whether it asks a follow-up question or calls according to the description, and check whether toolChoice and functionCall appear in the record.
Business test: use one real record to find fields inconsistent with the ledger, hand them to the reviewer for confirmation and write back.
- Open the tool node description field, check whether this description can be understood when taken out on its own, and confirm that the parameter description and whether required items correspond one by one to the material fields.
- Check the diamond connection and node status on the canvas, and test-run with a question missing that field to see whether it first asks a follow-up question instead of directly fabricating.