What this category's data looks like
In the compulsory education dropout prevention and control scenario, the draftable materials and handover records mainly come from three types of materials: dropout risk ledgers, persuasion-to-return records, and home visit records. Ledger fields include student name, student ID number, risk level, registration date, and responsible person's signature; persuasion-to-return records include persuasion time, method, participants, result, and receipt; home visit records include home visit date, teacher, parent signature, and image description. The three types of materials are updated weekly and archived monthly. When entering the model access and configuration stage, each has a different role: the ledger is used to generate risk summary drafts, persuasion-to-return records are used to generate persuasion-to-return situation statements, and home visit records are used to generate home visit supporting attachments. Field characteristics are concentrated in dates, quantities, signatures, and version numbers, and each item must be aligned during handover.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by the server-side model channel configuration, outputting model binding relationships and channel responses. The draftable materials and handover records are then completed by subsequent AI nodes, code nodes, or manual work. Models are divided into five categories: language, indexing, reranking, speech synthesis, and speech recognition, and the binding type corresponds to the step.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Dropout risk ledger | Fields are complete, the responsible person is clear, and version and date are consistent | Check the student name, student ID number, risk level, registration date, and responsible person's signature, and compare whether the names, quantities, and dates in the two materials are consistent |
| Persuasion-to-return record | Persuasion time, method, participants, result, and receipt are complete | Check the persuasion time and receipt signature, confirm that the version number is consistent with the ledger, and check that the tokens and array item count of the referenced text are recorded separately |
| Home visit record | Home visit date, teacher, parent signature, and image description are complete | Check the home visit date and parent signature, and check whether the names and quantities of the same record match between the draft and the handover record |
| Model binding relationship | The model type corresponds to the step to be used, and the model identifier is consistent with the name listed in the documentation | Check the type annotation in the model configuration, compare it with the model name returned by the channel, and check the value sources of maxContext, maxTokens, toolChoice, and quoteMaxToken |
Three common errors
- Phenomenon: The name and date of the same student do not match between the ledger and the persuasion-to-return record. Cause: The two materials are registered separately and are not aligned by unified fields and version numbers.
- Phenomenon: The home visit record lacks a parent signature or receipt and is returned during handover. Cause: The signature field is not generated synchronously with the draft, and each item is not checked before handover.
- Phenomenon: Retrieval reports an indexing model-related error or authentication failure. Cause: The model type and step binding are inconsistent, and the channel key does not match the accessed service.
How to verify the setup
This feature acceptance: run one conversation and one retrieval, check the model identifier in the response, and check the value sources of maxContext, maxTokens, toolChoice, and quoteMaxToken.
Business test: draft one according to the template and complete one handover, and see whether missing items are blocked.
- In the model configuration, check whether the model type annotation corresponds to the step to be used, and confirm the model identifier against the model name returned by the channel.
- Check whether the channel configuration and key source are consistent with the accessed service, and confirm the model binding relationship and channel response.