What this category's data looks like
This page addresses material drafting and responsibility handover in school moral education and homeroom teacher work scenarios, covering three types of materials: themed class meeting plans, student comprehensive quality records, and home visit records. The materials come from homeroom teachers' daily records, grade group summaries, and moral education office archives. The update cadence advances weekly or by activity milestones. Field characteristics include student name, activity theme, time, location, participants, evaluation points, signature, and receipt. Themed class meeting plans focus on process and objectives, student comprehensive quality records focus on stage performance and evidence, and home visit records focus on communication content and confirmation by both parties. When these materials enter the model integration and configuration function, themed class meeting plans serve as input for dialogue-generated drafts, student comprehensive quality records serve as the basis for retrieval comparison and version verification, and home visit records serve as the object for checking handover receipts and signature completeness. Model channel configuration is only responsible for binding relationships and channel responses. Whether materials can be read and whether they can be issued depends on the configuration of knowledge base material permissions in the dialogue and retrieval steps.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by the server-side model channel configuration, outputting model binding relationships and channel responses. Issuable material drafts and handover records are completed subsequently by AI nodes, code nodes, or manual work. Models are divided into five categories: language, indexing, reranking, speech synthesis, and speech recognition. Different steps bind different model types, and the type labels and model names returned by the channel must be checked in the model configuration.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Themed class meeting plan | Field completeness: whether activity theme, time, location, participants, process, signature, and receipt are complete; whether date and version are consistent | Check off items one by one against the template, verify the student roster and activity date, and inspect the signature and receipt fields; in the dialogue and retrieval steps, check the values of maxContext, maxTokens, and quoteMaxToken and the tokens of the quoted text, recording the number of array items separately |
| Student comprehensive quality record | Whether the name, quantity, and date of the same record match across the two materials; whether versions are synchronized | Extract student names, evaluation items, and dates from the two materials for cross-comparison, and verify the version number and update date; in the retrieval step, check the impact of quoteMaxToken and toolChoice on the quoted content budget and tool selection |
| Home visit record | Whether signatures and receipts are complete; whether communication content and date are consistent with the handover record | Inspect the parent or guardian signature field, teacher signature field, and receipt field, and verify the home visit date and handover date; in the dialogue step, check whether maxTokens and maxContext satisfy long-text records |
| Model binding relationship | The model type corresponds to the step to be used; the channel and key are consistent with the integrated service; the model identifier is consistent with the name listed in the documentation | Check the type labels in the model configuration, verify the channel configuration and key source, compare against the model name returned by the channel; run one dialogue and one retrieval, and check the model identifier in the response |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The name, number of evaluation items, or date of the same student does not match across the two materials. Cause: The field source was not unified during drafting, and cross-comparison was not performed before handover.
- Symptom: The versions of the themed class meeting plan and the student comprehensive quality record are not synchronized, and the old version is still issued. Cause: The version number and update date were not updated as the materials moved through the process.
- Symptom: The home visit record lacks a signature or receipt, and the handover record cannot be signed for. Cause: The handover step did not check the completeness of the signature and receipt fields.
How to verify the setup
This function's acceptance: run one dialogue and one retrieval, check the model identifier in the response, confirm that the language model and indexing model are bound to the corresponding steps respectively, and check the values of maxContext, maxTokens, quoteMaxToken, and toolChoice and the tokens of the quoted text.
Business test: draft one copy according to the template and complete one handover, and see whether missing items are blocked.
- In the model configuration, check whether the model type labels, channel configuration and key source, and the model name returned by the channel are consistent.
- Extract names, quantities, dates, and signature receipts from the themed class meeting plan, student comprehensive quality record, and home visit record, perform cross-comparison, and record the version numbers.