Tool Call and Plugin for Competitor Quote Bidding and Tender Reports

Competitor quote data is primarily sourced from public bidding platforms, industry compliance databases, and enterprise historical tender archives.

What the Data for This Category Looks Like

Competitor quote data is primarily sourced from public bidding platforms, industry compliance databases, and enterprise historical tender archives. The update rhythm fluctuates with the release schedule of target bidding projects. Quote data for a single project is updated in a concentrated batch before the tender deadline. Documentation uses structured tables as the core carrier, which include fields such as quote item name, technical specification, unit price, total price, bidder, and quote submission time. The unit price unit is mostly yuan per individual specification unit, and the total price unit is yuan.

Constraints Imposed by These Characteristics on Tool Calls and Plugins

Structured table-focused characteristics require tool calls to support table structure recognition and accurate field extraction, to avoid errors from unstructured text parsing. The concentrated update rhythm requires scheduled pull tasks for tools to support flexible adjustment of trigger periods, to adapt to information release windows of different projects. Multi-dimensional field requirements require plugins to support custom field mapping, to adapt to format differences across bidding projects. The limited data volume of a single project requires batch pull thresholds for tool calls to adapt to small dataset processing logic, to avoid resource waste.

Configuration Recommendations

Configuration ItemRecommended ValuesRationale
tool_table_parse_threshold0.85–0.95Confidence threshold for determining competitor quote table structure, adapted to standardized bidding quote table formats
pull_task_cron*/30 * * * * to 0 0 * * 0Flexible configuration of scheduled pull periods to adapt to the release rhythm of bidding project information
custom_field_mappingPreset field mapping according to target project templatesAdapt to field differences across bidding projects, enabling accurate extraction of required quote information
tool_batch_fetch_limit10–20 items per callAdapt to the data volume of competitor quotes for a single project, avoiding resource overload during single calls
plugin_request_timeout600 secondsAdapt to response delays from cross-source pulling, avoiding interruptions to calls due to timeout
parse_table_max_rows500 rowsLimit the number of table rows parsed per call, adapted to the conventional scale of competitor quote tables

The parameter values provided on this page are common starting points for configuration. Actual values are affected by material format, data volume and business rules. Specific issues require individual analysis, and it is recommended to test on your own samples before finalizing.

Three Common Mistakes

  • Phenomenon: Custom environment variables called in a workflow return empty values. Cause: Variable scope was not correctly declared in deployment configuration, causing the workflow to fail to read environment variables within the container.
  • Phenomenon: An error is returned when calling a workflow containing QWQ_32B via API, but in-app testing works normally. Cause: The application secret was not correctly carried during API calling, or the request header format did not meet requirements, causing authentication failure.
  • Phenomenon: After upgrading to version 9.0, m3e model calls return abnormal format. Cause: The model's interface return fields were changed in the new version, and the field parsing rules for tool calls were not updated synchronously.

How to Confirm Configuration Is Complete

  • Run a single tool call test, verify that the returned quote fields match the preset mapping rules.
  • Check the tool call logs to confirm that the pull period matches the configured pull_task_cron parameter.
  • Trigger the API call workflow, verify that the returned results match the in-app test results.
  • Adjust the value range of configuration items, verify that the response delay and parsing accuracy of tool calls meet expected standards.

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.