What this category's data looks like
This page addresses primary and secondary school timetable and after-school service scheduling scenarios. The materials come from academic affairs and grade-level teams: the master timetable is published by semester, teacher assignment tables are adjusted by week, and after-school service program tables are updated according to registration and venue rotation. The three materials emphasize different fields: the master timetable contains class, period, week, date, and academic affairs signature; the teacher assignment table contains teacher, subject, class, number of class hours, and teaching and research group leader signature; the after-school service program table contains program name, number of participants, venue, time slot, and responsible person receipt. After the materials enter the workflow, they respectively serve as the source of exceptions, the comparison baseline, and the basis for handling. The exception list and review conclusions are completed by subsequent nodes continuing execution along branches.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by workflow nodes (user selection and branching), outputting branch directions and interaction status records. The exception list and review conclusions are completed by subsequent nodes continuing execution along branches. When the user selection node is triggered, the conversation enters an interactive state and records the workflow status. After the user completes the selection, execution continues along the branch corresponding to the selected option.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Master timetable | Whether class, period, week, date, and academic affairs signature are complete, and whether the name, quantity, and date of the same record can be matched with the teacher assignment table and after-school service program table | Compare the fields and dates of the three materials one by one, and check whether signatures and receipts are missing; check the options and branch connections one by one in the node, and record nodeId and branch direction |
| Teacher assignment table | Whether teacher, subject, class, number of class hours, and teaching and research group leader signature are complete, and whether the version is synchronized with the master timetable | Extract records for the same teacher and same class, and compare the number of class hours and dates; reference the selection result variable in variables in a subsequent node and run a trial once, and check version differences |
| After-school service program table | Whether program name, number of participants, venue, time slot, and responsible person receipt are complete, and whether the name, quantity, and date of the same record can be matched with the master timetable and teacher assignment table | Check the consistency of program names and participant numbers in the two materials, and check receipt signatures; trigger a user selection node once and view the node status in the run record |
| Exception list and review conclusions | Whether exceptions are supported by original records, whether reviewer signatures are complete, and whether they can be traced back to the source materials | Create an exception record, trace it back along the branch direction to the original entry in the master timetable, teacher assignment table, or after-school service program table, and check signatures and receipts |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The name, quantity, and date of the same record do not match between the master timetable and the teacher assignment table. Cause: The two materials are maintained by different personnel, with different update rhythms, and no field-level comparison was performed.
- Symptom: The version of the after-school service program table is not synchronized, and the old version is still referenced. Cause: After the version update, the interaction status record was not triggered, and subsequent nodes continued execution along the old branch.
- Symptom: The exception list lacks signatures or receipts, and the review conclusions cannot be traced. Cause: The review step was not bound to the original records, and signatures and receipts were not retained together with the branch direction.
How to verify the setup
This feature acceptance: run trials for each option one by one, check the branch direction and interaction status in the run record, confirm that the selection result variable has been passed to subsequent nodes, and review by referencing variables and nodeId in subsequent nodes; the number of references is the array length, and quoteMaxToken is the reference content budget. The two are not compared for equality.
Business test: create an exception record and see whether it can be traced back to the source materials
- Check the options and branch connections one by one in the node, trigger a user selection node once, and view the node status in the run record
- Reference the selection result variable in a subsequent node and run a trial once to confirm that the selection result has been passed to the subsequent node