What this category's data looks like
This category of data originates from enterprise contract management systems, compliance risk databases, legal and regulatory repositories, case management systems, and reporting platforms. The update frequency is monthly. Daily generated documents include compliance risk lists, contract legal review opinions, legal opinions on major matters, compliance review forms, and violation report investigation reports. Data fields cover compliance risk levels, contract clause compliance, legal risk points for major matters, reporting clue disposal progress, and more. There are no unified fixed units, with values adjusting based on the document type.
What constraints these characteristics impose on the "tool calling and plugins" workflow
Monthly updated data sources require that the knowledge base synchronization cycle for tool calling matches the monthly rhythm, to avoid frequent synchronization consuming system resources. Data from multiple systems requires plugins to connect to multiple heterogeneous system APIs, and handle differences in document formats and field specifications across different systems. Diverse document types require tool calling to adapt to extraction logic for different fields, such as differentiated processing for contract clause compliance fields and reporting clue disposal progress fields. Severe error consequences require tool calling to configure failure retry and alert mechanisms, while also supporting relational data association queries to adapt to the entity relationships between compliance risks, contracts, and cases.
Configuration Settings
Reference only; verify against the target FastGPT release and deployment documentation.
| Configuration Item | Recommended Setting | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
toolChoice | auto or specify a compliance review tool | Adapt to tool calling requirements for legal compliance scenarios, accurately trigger corresponding functional modules |
| Knowledge base synchronization cycle | 30 days | Match the monthly update frequency of business data, avoid unnecessary synchronization resource consumption |
| Number of plugin-connected data sources | No more than 5 | Adapt to the actual access scale of multi-system data sources, reduce the probability of interface call conflicts |
functionCall | Triggered by question | Target high-frequency scenarios such as compliance risk identification and contract review, ensure tool calling is executed on demand |
| Number of failure retries | 2 times | Balance call success rate and resource consumption, adapt to the requirements of legal scenarios for result reliability |
| Context window length | 8000–12000 token | Accommodate context information of long documents such as compliance reviews and major matter opinions, ensure complete analysis |
Three Common Misconfigurations
- Phenomenon: When calling a tool, "No matching knowledge base found" is returned. Cause: The bound knowledge base ID was not correctly passed in the workflow or API request, or the knowledge base ID does not match the data source.
- Phenomenon: The compliance risk association result returned by tool calling lacks entity relationships. Cause: Relational index configuration was not enabled, and only flat entity indexing was used, which cannot match the association logic between compliance risks, contracts, and cases.
- Phenomenon: A file format error is returned after uploading a file via the API call workflow. Cause: The file parameters were not encapsulated in multipart/form-data format as required, or the file size exceeded the preset limit of the plugin.
How to Confirm Configuration Completion
- View tool calling logs to confirm that each call correctly matches the configured data source and knowledge base, with no empty fields or error ID prompts.
- Trigger a monthly synchronization task to check whether documents from the data source are fully synchronized to the knowledge base, matching the update rhythm of business data.
- Submit a test question involving compliance risk and contract association to verify whether tool calling returns expected relational analysis results.
- Simulate an API call workflow request to check that the returned response status code is within the normal range, with no format error prompts.
The values provided are common starting points and should be measured 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.