Reference only; verify against the target FastGPT release and deployment documentation.
What this category of data looks like
This category of data comes from the medical insurance intelligent monitoring system, fund supervision rule base, medical insurance settlement data, drug and consumable traceability codes, and report clues. The update frequency is monthly. Daily processed documents include audit notices, inspection work papers, suspicious point lists, interview records, decision letters for handling, and rectification reports. Core fields include types of violations, involved cost scope, handling agency information, qualification information of designated medical institutions, etc. The data exists in a form that combines structured settlement fields and unstructured document content.
What constraints do these characteristics impose on the "multi-turn dialogue and prompt engineering" link
The monthly updated supervision rule base requires that multi-turn dialogue contexts must synchronize the latest rule entries regularly to avoid referencing expired judgment criteria. The data includes structured settlement fields and unstructured document content. Prompts must clearly distinguish the calling logic of the two types of data to ensure accurate matching of structured fields and paragraph-by-paragraph verification of unstructured documents. The business attribute of post-event audit requires that multi-turn dialogue proceeds step by step according to the inspection process. Contexts from historical links such as suspicious point lists and interview records must be retained. At the same time, since the consequences of violation determination directly relate to fund losses, the dialogue must retain the judgment basis of each round to prevent ambiguity.
How to set the configuration
| Configuration Item | Recommended Setting | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
messages | Retain the last 12 rounds of historical messages, with no more than 8000–12000 characters per round | Medical insurance audit processes mostly involve multi-step inspections. Retaining the last 12 rounds can cover the complete inspection logic and avoid context overload |
variables | Bind the monthly updated supervision rule ID and designated institution qualification fields | Dynamic calls to the latest rules and institution information are required to ensure that judgment standards align with current compliance requirements |
| Maximum context length | 8000–12000 characters | Must accommodate the complete content of a single audit notice, corresponding settlement data, and suspicious point lists, while avoiding exceeding the model's processing limits |
| Question Optimization | Enabled, calibrated based on actual testing | Audit dialogue needs to gradually break down complex suspicious points. Question optimization can transform vague requests into structured suspicious point investigation instructions |
| Single search limit | Top 6 matching results | Need to focus on core suspicious points to avoid irrelevant data interfering with violation determination |
chatId | Bind the unique identifier of the corresponding audit matter | Ensure that dialogue context is only associated with the current audit task and prevent cross-task data confusion |
Three Common Mistakes
- Phenomenon: The dialogue history shows "No permission to operate this conversation record". Cause: The permission scope of the corresponding audit matter is not bound via
variables, triggering a permission verification intercept during context calls. - Phenomenon: The latest monthly updated supervision rules cannot be recalled in multi-turn dialogue. Cause: The regularly synchronized bound rule base variable is not configured, and old version rule parameters are still used.
- Phenomenon: Knowledge base citations are automatically added at the end of responses and cannot be canceled. Cause: The automatic citation configuration in the dialogue scenario is not turned off, and the general knowledge base citation rule is mistakenly applied to audit-specific data.
How to Confirm the Configuration is Correct
- Initiate a new audit dialogue, enter keywords from historical suspicious point lists, and verify that the returned content includes the corresponding monthly updated supervision rules.
- View the dialogue history and confirm that only the last 12 rounds of
messagescontent are retained, with no redundant historical messages. - Attempt to modify the bound
variablesrule ID, and verify that the dialogue judgment logic is updated synchronously. - Initiate a violation determination request, and confirm that no knowledge base citation entries are automatically added to the response.
The values provided here are common starting points and should be evaluated against the reader's own samples.
Question material comes from public community discussions. Configuration values are common starting points and should be measured against your own samples. Verified on 2026-09-28.