What this category's data looks like
This page addresses progress records and statistical verification in graduate training process management. The source materials are training plans, proposal reports, and mid-term assessment forms, updated weekly or monthly. A training plan contains course, credit, and start/end date fields; a proposal report contains title, date, and supervisor signature fields; a mid-term assessment form contains assessment items, conclusions, and signature receipts. When these materials enter the tool call and plugin feature, each plays a different role: the training plan provides baseline fields and planned dates, the proposal report provides milestone dates and signature status, and the mid-term assessment form provides stage conclusions and receipt information. The fields, dates, and signatures of the three must remain consistent across the progress table and the statistical scope description. Common inconsistencies include the same record's name, quantity, or date not matching across two materials, versions not synchronized, and missing signatures or receipts.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by the tool call node in the workflow (the model decides whether to call, the node executes), outputting the tool call result (the inputs and returns in the call record). The "progress table and statistical scope description" is then completed by a subsequent AI node or manual verification. The model decides whether to call the tool based on the tool description, parameter descriptions, 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 value in the context, it may not call.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Training plan | Whether fields, dates, and signatures align item by item with the proposal report and mid-term assessment form | Open the tool node's description fields and check whether the courses, credits, and start/end dates in the training plan can be covered by the tool parameter descriptions; run a test with a query missing a required parameter to see whether it asks a follow-up question first |
| Proposal report | Whether the title, date, and supervisor signature field are consistent with the training plan and mid-term assessment form | Open each parameter configuration one by one and check the description and whether it is required; check whether the values of toolChoice and functionCall in the call record come from material fields |
| Mid-term assessment form | Whether the assessment items, conclusions, and receipts match the training plan and proposal report | On the canvas, check the diamond connectors and node status, and confirm that the tool call node's connector is linked to the target tool; use one week's records to verify the totals and see whether the scope and exceptions are clearly stated |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The same record's name, quantity, or date does not match between the training plan and the proposal report. Cause: The two materials are maintained separately, and fields have not been mapped and checked.
- Symptom: The mid-term assessment form version is not synchronized, and old-version signatures are mixed with new-version conclusions. Cause: After the material was updated, it was not re-entered into the tool call node for verification.
- Symptom: The returned result contains values that do not exist in the business materials, and the model answers directly without calling the tool. Cause: The tool description or parameter descriptions do not state the purpose and values, and when required items are missing, the prompt does not guide follow-up questions.
How to verify the setup
Feature acceptance: run a test with a query missing a required parameter, check the inputs and returns in the call record, and confirm whether it asks a follow-up question or calls according to the description; also check toolChoice, functionCall, and the diamond interface status of the tool call node's connector.
Business test: use one week's records to verify the totals and see whether the scope and exceptions are clearly stated; the number of quotes is the array length, and quoteMaxToken is the quote content budget. The two are not compared for equality. If a quote limit is involved, check the tokens of the quoted text, and record the array count separately.
- Open the description field in the tool node, check whether this description can be understood on its own, and verify the parameter descriptions and whether they are required.
- Run a test with a query missing that field to see whether it asks a follow-up question first rather than fabricating directly; on the canvas, check the diamond connectors and node status.