What the Data for This Category Looks Like
Data for construction machinery intelligent due diligence reports primarily comes from equipment manufacturer operation and maintenance systems, construction site project management platforms, third-party leasing service providers, and quality inspection institutions. Data update rhythms fall into three categories: real-time equipment operation data is synchronized hourly, leasing status is updated daily, and maintenance and quality inspection records are updated when work orders are triggered. A single due diligence report document includes fields such as equipment number, model, production date, cumulative operating duration, number of maintenance times, lessee information, current location, and residual value. The unit for operating duration is hours, the unit for residual value is Chinese yuan, and the location field mostly uses longitude and latitude or project address format.
What Constraints Do These Characteristics Impose on HTTP Interfaces and External Systems?
The multi-source and batch update characteristics of construction machinery due diligence data require external interfaces to support both incremental pull and full pull modes, to avoid redundant data being pulled repeatedly. The structure with multiple fields and fixed units requires that the fields returned by the interface strictly match the configured mapping rules, to prevent unit conversion errors or missing fields. Some data involves sensitive information of project parties and lessees, which requires that the interface authentication method supports flexible configuration, while also limiting the permission scope of single interface calls. The long document structure requires interfaces to support paged returns, to prevent timeouts caused by excessive load from a single request.
How to Configure Settings
| Configuration Item | Recommended Value | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
external_api_request_timeout | 300–600 seconds | A single due diligence report may include aggregated data for multiple pieces of equipment, so sufficient response time must be reserved |
external_api_auth_type | apikey / custom | Adapts to the authentication logic of most third-party construction machinery operation and maintenance platforms, avoiding conflicts caused by default Bearer automatic supplementation |
external_api_pagination_size | 10–50 items per page | The amount of equipment data returned per page is moderate, balancing request efficiency and data transmission volume |
external_api_field_mapping | Device Number→device_id, 运行时长→run_hours, 剩余残值→residual_value | Standardizes non-uniform field names returned by external interfaces, adapting to the exclusive field definitions of construction machinery data |
workflow_dynamic_token | Bind by custom parameters passed by caller | Supports passing different authentication keys in workflows, adapting to multi-tenant calling scenarios |
external_api_response_parse_mode | json | Construction machinery due diligence data is mostly in structured JSON format, adapting to standard parsing logic |
The parameter values provided on this page are common starting points for configuration. Actual values are affected by material form, data volume and business rules. Specific issues require specific analysis, and it is recommended to test on your own samples before finalizing.
Three Common Mistakes
- Symptom: A 401 unauthorized error is returned when calling an external interface, and the request header log shows that both the automatically generated default Bearer token and manually configured authentication fields are carried. Cause: The FastGPT default Bearer automatic supplementation switch was not turned off, resulting in authentication field conflicts.
- Symptom: An empty result is returned when calling a database-associated interface, and expected SQL execution data cannot be obtained. Cause: Correct response parsing rules were not configured, and the database connection verification result was mistakenly parsed as business data.
- Symptom: Authentication failure is returned when the workflow calls interfaces for different tenants, and the fixed configured key cannot adapt to multiple scenarios. Cause: Dynamic parameter configuration was not enabled, and the token parameter was not bound as a workflow input variable.
How to Confirm Configuration Is Successful
- Manually trigger a test interface call, check the Headers field in the request log, and confirm that no additional Bearer tokens are automatically added.
- View the structured data returned by the interface, verify whether the field names match the configured mapping rules, and whether the units conform to preset standards.
- Pass different authentication keys to trigger calls, and verify that different tenants can normally obtain due diligence data for corresponding equipment.
- Check the timeout logs of interface calls, confirm that the number of timeouts is within an acceptable range, and there are no frequent timeouts.
Question material comes from public community discussions. Configuration values are common starting points and should be measured against your own samples. Verified on 2026-09-14.