What This Category of Data Looks Like
Data for this category originates from internal approval systems for services including water utility connection applications, drainage permits, and water usage changes. Updates happen in real time as each individual application submission is processed, following the timeline of the application workflow. The core of the data is structured forms, with attachments such as engineering drawings and scanned approval documents. Fields include project address, water usage type, applicant information, case number, approval stage, and more. Units use standard municipal engineering units such as meters, square meters, and cubic meters.
Constraints on HTTP Interfaces and External Systems
This category of data includes structured form fields and multiple types of attachments, requiring HTTP interfaces to support both text parameters and file uploads. Fields must strictly follow the fixed naming conventions and units used in water utility business. Interface parameter validation must cover the format of municipal-specific fields such as address, area, and water usage. The real-time update workflow requires interface response delays to be kept within a reasonable range to avoid blocking approval processes. Variations in fields across different application scenarios require interfaces to pass dynamic business parameters via variables to adapt to diverse case review requirements.
Reference only; verify against the target FastGPT release and deployment documentation.
Configuration Settings
| Configuration Item | Recommended Approach | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
Authorization | Use a dedicated Bearer Token for the water utility system, valid for 2 hours | Aligns with the authentication rules of internal water utility systems, ensures secure interface calls, and avoids frequent token refreshes |
variables | Pass business fields such as project address and water usage type, with no more than 20 passed per request | Meets the structured field requirements of application materials, and adapts to different types of case review scenarios |
responseData | Return only core fields such as approval status and case number, filter out redundant attachment data | Reduces the volume of interface return data, improves FastGPT processing efficiency, and focuses on core case review information |
| Timeout setting | 30–60 seconds | Covers the typical query delay for water utility business data, avoids blocking approval processes |
| Attachment upload limit | 1000 MB | Supports transmission requirements for large attachments such as engineering drawings and scanned approval documents |
Three Common Misconfigurations
- Issue: Interface calls return 401 Unauthorized, or existing authentication configurations are overwritten by new configurations. Cause: Independent authentication parameters are not configured for different water utility application scenarios, leading to conflicts when multiple applications share the same
Authorizationtoken. - Issue: Interface calls time out, returning 504 Gateway Timeout errors. Cause: Timeout settings are not adjusted based on water utility business data volume; overly short timeout periods fail to complete queries for large attachments or complex case data.
- Issue: Returned case data has missing fields or incorrect formatting. Cause: Correct business parameters are not passed via
variables, causing the interface to fail to match the field rules for the corresponding application materials.
How to Verify Successful Configuration
- Call the configured interface, check that the returned
responseDataonly includes preset core fields with no redundant content. - Pass test business parameters, confirm that the interface can normally return the approval status and case number for the corresponding application project.
- Upload a small test attachment, confirm that the interface can normally receive and process file transfer requests.
- View interface call logs, confirm that the
Authorizationtoken is carried correctly, with no authentication failure records.
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.