What this category of data looks like
The review documents covered in this category include procurement plans, requirement specifications, bidding documents, bid evaluation records, contracts, acceptance slips, supplier complaint materials, and more. Data sources include enterprise procurement platforms, public resource trading platforms, supplier databases, contract management systems, and audit issue databases, with daily updates. Document fields include procurement entity information, budget amount, procurement method, supplier qualifications, scoring rules, performance acceptance clauses, and more. There is no unified fixed unit, and the format adjusts based on the specific business document. The processing objects cover the full process requirements of declaration material and file review for central state-owned enterprise procurement centers, bidding offices, business requirement departments, audit and discipline inspection departments, and bidding agencies.
What constraints these characteristics impose on the HTTP Interfaces and External Systems link
Since data sources are scattered across multiple internal enterprise systems and public platforms, interfaces must support cross-system authentication and data pulling. The daily update frequency requires interface call frequency to align with business rhythms, preventing excessive requests from occupying system resources. Document fields have no unified format, so interfaces must support flexible field mapping and verification rules to adapt to declaration material structures across different business scenarios. The review process involves cross-department collaboration, so interfaces must support batch pulling of file data and associated queries. They must also meet audit traceability requirements, retaining complete call logs and returned data. Errors may lead to bid rigging risks, audit rectification, invalid contracts, or personnel accountability. Interfaces must have stable failure retry and exception alert capabilities to avoid blocking of review processes due to interrupted calls.
How to configure the settings
Reference only; verify against the target FastGPT release and deployment documentation.
| Configuration Item | Recommended Setting | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Timeout period | 600 seconds | Adapts to the maximum processing duration for a single batch of file reviews, avoiding call failures due to response delays from internal systems |
Authorization | Carry enterprise-specific API keys | Meets cross-system authentication requirements, differentiating interface access permissions for different business departments |
variables | Pass procurement batch ID, review node type | Accurately locate declaration materials and file data for the corresponding batch, narrowing the query scope |
responseData | Only return core fields required for review | Reduces data transmission volume, improves interface call efficiency, and complies with compliance audit data retention requirements |
| Maximum files per call | 50 items | Balances interface load and review efficiency, avoiding timeouts caused by excessive data volume in a single request |
| Retry count | 3 times | Addresses temporary network fluctuations or short-term external system failures, preventing process blocking from a single failed call |
Three common configuration errors
- A 504 status code is returned when calling the interface, with a request timeout prompt. The cause is failing to adjust the timeout period based on the business scenario, using the default short duration configuration instead, which cannot adapt to response delays from internal systems of central state-owned enterprises.
- An incorrect key format is passed when configuring the
Authorizationparameter, causing a direct error during interface testing. The cause is failing to distinguish between authentication key formats for internal enterprise systems and the FastGPT platform, mixing credentials from different systems. - The
responseDatafield returned by the interface contains redundant business data, leading to data parsing failures during the review process. The cause is failing to configure only core review fields to be returned, pulling unnecessary non-essential document content beyond requirements, which increases data transmission load and parsing complexity.
How to confirm the configuration is complete
- Initiate an interface call for a known procurement batch, check if the returned
responseDataincludes the preset core review fields. - Simulate a network delay scenario, verify whether the interface triggers the retry mechanism after exceeding the configured timeout period.
- Check the authentication result of the
Authorizationparameter, confirm that only authorized business departments can access the corresponding interface. - View the interface call logs, confirm that each request carries the correct
variablesparameter to locate file data for the corresponding batch.
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.