What this category's data looks like
This page addresses the scenario of formulating talent cultivation plans in vocational colleges. The materials include talent cultivation plans, course standards, and job competency analysis tables. Talent cultivation plans come from academic affairs offices or secondary colleges, are updated by academic year or by major revision cycle, and contain major name, cultivation objectives, course structure, credit hours and credits, signature fields, and version number; course standards come from course teams, are updated as courses are adjusted, and contain course name, objectives, content, assessment methods, and signatures of the writer and reviewer; job competency analysis tables come from major research or enterprise interviews, are updated by research batch, and contain job name, competency items, corresponding courses, research date, and receipt. When these three types of materials enter the tool calling and plugin feature, the talent cultivation plan serves as the main record providing the major and course framework, the course standard serves as course-level detail providing the name and credit hour fields, and the job competency analysis table serves as the competency source providing the job and competency item fields, for subsequent nodes to perform progress recording and statistical verification.
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 input parameters and return in the call record). The "progress table and statistical criteria description" is then completed by a subsequent AI node or manual verification. Based on the tool description, parameter descriptions, and whether parameters are required, the model determines whether to call the tool this time.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Talent cultivation plan | Check whether the major name, course name, credit hours and credits, revision date, and signature fields are consistent with the course standard, and whether the version number is synchronized | Open the tool node description field and check whether the description can be understood on its own; run a test with a question missing the major name to see whether the model asks a follow-up question first; verify the diamond-shaped interface and node connections on the canvas |
| Course standard | Check whether the course name, credit hours, assessment methods, and signatures of the writer and reviewer match the talent cultivation plan, and whether the dates fall within the same revision cycle | Open each parameter configuration one by one and check the two items: parameter description and whether it is required; run a test with a question missing the course name to see whether it asks a follow-up question first; record whether any values appear in the return that do not exist in the materials |
| Job competency analysis table | Check whether the job name, competency items, corresponding courses, research date, and receipt correspond to the course standard, and whether the names and quantities are consistent | Check whether the required parameters correspond to the business material fields; run a test with a question missing the job name to see whether it asks a follow-up question first; check whether the results returned after multiple tools are chained together are mixed up with each other |
| Tool calling node | Check whether the three items—tool description, parameter description, and whether required—correspond to the business material fields, and whether the connections are complete | Verify the diamond-shaped connections and node status on the canvas; after a test run, view the input parameters and return in the call record, and confirm whether toolChoice, functionCall, and the configuration related to functionCall take effect as described |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The same course has mismatched names and credit hours in the talent cultivation plan and the course standard. Cause: The two materials are maintained separately, versions are not synchronized, and after revision one is not written back to the other.
- Symptom: The number of competency items in the job competency analysis table is inconsistent with the number of corresponding courses in the course standard. Cause: After the research batch is updated, it is not synchronized to the course team, and the date and receipt are missing.
- Symptom: The model does not call the tool and directly gives an answer, and values appear in the returned result that do not exist in the business materials. Cause: The tool description or parameter description is written vaguely, and the required parameters have no suitable values in the context.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance of this feature: run a test with a question missing a required parameter, check the input parameters and return in the call record, and confirm whether it asks a follow-up question or calls according to the description; at the same time, check the behavior of toolChoice and functionCall in the call record.
Business test: use one week of records to check the totals and see whether the criteria and exceptions are clearly stated; compare the names, quantities, and dates of the same record item by item across the talent cultivation plan, course standard, and job competency analysis table, and confirm that items missing signatures or receipts are marked.
- Open the tool node description field and check whether this description can be understood when taken out on its own; open each parameter configuration one by one and check the two items: description and whether required.
- Run a test with a question missing a required field to see whether it asks a follow-up question first rather than directly fabricating; verify the diamond-shaped connections and node status on the canvas, and confirm that results are not mixed up after multiple tools are chained together.