What this category's data looks like
In the scenario of annual progress and acceptance of research projects, common materials include annual progress reports, mid-term review materials, and acceptance reports. Annual progress reports are updated quarterly or semi-annually, focusing on task milestone completion, fund usage, and personnel input; mid-term review materials are submitted centrally in the middle of project execution, focusing on stage goal achievement and adjustment explanations; acceptance reports are formed at the project completion stage, emphasizing indicator achievement, results lists, and signed receipts. When these three types of materials enter the tool calls and plugins feature, the annual progress report plays the role of the draft for progress records and statistical verification, the mid-term review materials play the role of stage-caliber comparison, and the acceptance report plays the role of verifying the final fields and signed receipts. Field characteristics center on project name, task number, start and end dates, number of indicators, funding amount, responsible person's signature, and unit receipt; the update rhythm and signature nodes determine the difficulty of version synchronization.
Configuration and implementation checks
This link is executed by the tool call 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 caliber description" is then completed by subsequent AI nodes or manual verification. Based on the tool introduction, parameter introduction, and whether 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 values in the context, it may not call.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Annual progress report | Fields must cover project name, task number, start and end dates, number of indicators, funding amount, and responsible person's signature; the date and signature columns must be aligned item by item with the mid-term review materials and acceptance report | Open the introduction field of the tool node and confirm that the purpose, when it should be used, and what result it returns can be understood on their own; check the parameter introduction and whether each is required one by one, and run a test with a question missing that field to see whether it asks a follow-up question first |
| Mid-term review materials | The name, quantity, and date of the same record in the annual progress report and mid-term review materials must be consistent; when the version is not synchronized, the version with the signed receipt shall prevail | Check the diamond connectors and node status on the canvas, and confirm that the tool call node connection is connected to the target tool; check whether the returned result contains values that do not exist in the business materials |
| Acceptance report | Indicator achievement, results list, and signed receipt must match the annual progress report and mid-term review materials; records missing signatures or receipts must not be counted in the total | Use one week of records to check the total and see whether the statistical caliber and exceptions are clearly stated; check the tokens of the quoted text, record the number of array items separately, and do not compare the number of quoted items with the quoted content budget as equal |
| Tool call node | Whether parameters are required must correspond to fields that actually exist in the business materials; when there are no required parameters, the model may fabricate parameter values on its own, and when there are required parameters but no suitable values in the context, it may not call | Run a test with a question missing a required parameter, and check the input parameters and return in the call record; confirm the connection status of toolChoice, functionCall, and the tool introduction on the canvas |
Three common errors
- Symptom: the name, quantity, and date of the same record in the annual progress report and mid-term review materials do not match. Cause: the two materials are maintained separately, the versions are not synchronized, and the signed receipt is not updated with the record.
- Symptom: the number of indicators in the acceptance report is inconsistent with the total in the annual progress report. Cause: the statistical caliber is not written in the header, exception records are not marked separately, and records missing signatures or receipts are counted.
- Symptom: the model does not call the tool and directly gives an answer, and values that do not exist in the business materials appear in the returned result. Cause: the tool introduction does not state the purpose and returned result, and the parameter introduction and whether parameters are required do not correspond to the business fields.
How to verify the setup
Feature acceptance: 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 introduction; check whether toolChoice, functionCall, and the three items of tool introduction, parameter introduction, and whether required are consistent.
Business test: use one week of records to check the total and see whether the caliber and exceptions are clearly stated; check the tokens of the quoted text, record the number of array items separately, and do not compare the number of quoted items with the quoted content budget as equal.
- Open the introduction field in the tool node and check whether this description can be understood when taken out on its own; open the parameter configuration one by one and check the two items of introduction and whether required.
- Check the diamond connectors and node status on the canvas; run a test with a question missing that field to see whether it asks a follow-up question first instead of directly fabricating.