What this category's data looks like
This category's data includes three types of materials: disciplinary fact materials, disciplinary decision documents, and appeal statements. Disciplinary fact materials record the course of conduct and the evidence list; disciplinary decision documents state the basis clauses, the type of disciplinary action, and the effective date; appeal statements carry the appeal request, reasons, and submission date. The sources of the materials are investigation records from the student affairs department, review texts from the school/department, and submissions from the appellant, and the update cadence advances with each stage of investigation, review, delivery, and appeal. When the three types of materials enter the external service function, their roles differ: disciplinary fact materials and disciplinary decision documents determine the scope of external visibility, while appeal statements determine the receipt and reply destination. Field characteristics center on name, quantity, date, and signature receipt; the same record must be aligned item by item between the two types of materials, and the version and signature status must be traceable.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by the HTTP node in the workflow, which outputs the response body, status code, and returned fields. The externally available entry point and authorization scope are determined by subsequent nodes parsing the response, or the external system handles it as agreed and then completes it. The HTTP node does not replace the external system in writing to the database or approving.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Disciplinary fact materials | The name, quantity, date, and signature must be aligned item by item with the disciplinary decision document; if the signature or receipt is missing, it must not be exposed externally | Take the two materials and compare the fields side by side, and include the material number and version number in the request body |
| Disciplinary decision document | The basis clauses, type of disciplinary action, and effective date must be consistent with the appeal receipt; if the version is not synchronized, it must not be opened | Check the Authorization in the request header and the material version, and compare the returned fields |
| Appeal statement | The appeal request, reasons, and submission date must correspond to the reply record; if the receipt is missing, it must not be marked as closed | Use variables to trace the placeholder source, and check the receipt fields in responseData |
| Request address and path parameters | The placeholder variables can be resolved into actual values, and unauthorized identities must not be visible | In the request preview, view the fully rendered address and the visible scope |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The name and quantity of the same disciplinary record do not match between the fact materials and the decision document. Cause: The two materials are entered separately and are not aligned by the same number and version.
- Symptom: The disciplinary decision document has been revised, but the external interface still returns the old basis clauses. Cause: The version is not synchronized, and the request body does not carry the version number.
- Symptom: The appeal statement lacks a signature or receipt but is still marked as externally available. Cause: The signature and receipt status are not included in the visibility scope determination.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance for this function: preview the rendered request, check the status code and returned fields, then compare the result against one sample, and use variables and responseData to trace placeholders and returns.
Business test: access once with a restricted identity and see whether the visible scope matches the setting.
- Check the request header names and value sources, and confirm that
Authorizationis passed in according to the external system's requirements. - In the variables panel, check the source of each placeholder and confirm that the request body fields are consistent with the external interface agreement.