What this category's data looks like
This page addresses the scenario of formulating talent cultivation plans in vocational colleges. The materials include three types: talent cultivation plans, course standards, and job competency analysis tables. Talent cultivation plans come from the academic affairs department and are updated by academic year or by major revision cycle. Their fields include major name, cultivation objectives, course setup, class hours and credits, signature, and date. Course standards come from course teams and are updated by course version. Their fields include course name, course objectives, content standards, assessment methods, signature, and date. Job competency analysis tables come from enterprise research and are updated by job research cycle. Their fields include job name, competency items, corresponding courses, quantity, date, and signature. When the materials enter the question intake and missing-item follow-up function, the talent cultivation plan serves as the primary basis, while the course standards and job competency analysis tables serve as cross-checking sources. The tool calling node is responsible for reading fields on demand and returning the call records, so that subsequent nodes can determine missing items and generate follow-up questions.
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), and it outputs the tool call result (the input parameters and return in the call record). "Intake records and the questions to be completed" are then handled by subsequent AI nodes or manual review. Based on the tool description, parameter description, and whether the 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Talent cultivation plan | Whether the fields, date, and signature are complete, and whether the major name is consistent with the course standards | Open the tool node description fields and check the cultivation objectives, course setup, class hours and credits, signature, and date; run a test with a question missing the signature to see whether it asks a follow-up first |
| Course standards | Whether the course name, course objectives, content standards, and assessment methods match the talent cultivation plan | Open each parameter configuration one by one and check the description and whether it is required; check whether the course name, quantity, and date returned by functionCall are consistent with the plan |
| Job competency analysis table | Whether the job name, competency items, corresponding courses, quantity, date, and signature are complete | Check the diamond-shaped connections and node status on the canvas to confirm that toolChoice points to the target tool; run a test with a question missing the job name to see whether it asks a follow-up first |
| Tool calling node connections | The diamond-shaped interface is connected to the target tool, and the node status is normal | Check the call records of toolChoice and functionCall to confirm that the input parameters come from material fields and that the return does not contain values that do not exist in the materials |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The course name, quantity, and date of the same record do not match between the talent cultivation plan and the course standards. Cause: The two material versions are not synchronized, and the field values returned by the tool call come from an old version.
- Symptom: The job competency analysis table is missing a signature or receipt, and the follow-up was not triggered. Cause: The parameters are not marked as required, so the model may fabricate parameter values on its own and does not guide the user to complete them.
- Symptom: After multiple tools are chained, the results interfere with each other, and values that do not exist in the business materials appear in the returned results. Cause: The tool description and parameter description do not state the purpose and values, so the model misjudges the call target.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance of this function: run a test with a question missing required parameters, 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 whether the input parameters of toolChoice and functionCall come from material fields, and whether the return contains values that do not exist in the materials.
Business test: ask a question missing key information and see whether it asks a follow-up before answering; the follow-up content should point to the fields, dates, or signatures in the talent cultivation plan, course standards, and job competency analysis table.
- Open the tool node description field and check whether this description can be understood when taken out alone, and whether it states the purpose, when it should be used, and what result it returns.
- Run a test with a question missing that field to see whether it asks a follow-up first instead of directly fabricating; check the parameter description and whether it is required, and confirm that they correspond to fields that actually exist in the business materials.