What the Data for This Category Looks Like
Data for this category originates from tender announcements, tender documents, enterprise qualification databases, and supplier quotation lists. Regularly generated documents include tender documents, qualification certificates, business deviation tables, and technical deviation tables. Core fields include tender project number, bidder qualification number, original response clauses, quotation details, and seal status. Data is updated once per order. The document structure for each tender project adjusts based on the format of the associated tender document, with no fixed unified template. Fields must match the format and content items specified by the tenderer.
Constraints Imposed on Workflow Orchestration
Because this category's data dynamically adjusts based on the requirements of each individual tender, the workflow must support temporarily inserting format check nodes to adapt to the format specifications of different tender documents. Since core documents must strictly match the fields specified by the tenderer, the workflow must preconfigure multiple sets of format template switching logic to avoid adaptation issues caused by hardcoding. Qualification and quotation data are sourced from external independent data sources, so the workflow must include cross-data-source call nodes and add data consistency check steps. Clause-by-clause response requires comparing the original tender text segment by segment, so the workflow must set up per-node check steps to prevent missed response content. A manual review node must also be added during the packaging stage to avoid disqualification resulting from format or content errors.
Configuration Settings
This configuration is based on the workflow orchestration feature of FastGPT v4.17.0.
| Configuration Item | Recommended Setting | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
variables | Preset dynamic variables based on tender document fields, such as {{tender project number}}, {{qualification validity period}} | Adapt to the dynamic field requirements of each individual tender, no need to modify workflow code each time |
nodeId | Name after document stage, such as qualification check node, clause response node | Facilitate quick localization of abnormal stages in logs, improving debugging efficiency |
| Single search limit | Top 10 entries | The volume of qualification and quotation data for tender projects is relatively concentrated, and the top 10 entries cover core call requirements |
| Timeout threshold | 600 seconds | Covers the full process duration of qualification verification, document generation, and cross-data-source calls |
| Maximum context | 8000–12000 characters | Tender documents usually contain multi-page clauses and qualification materials, requiring sufficient context for response generation |
| Tool call retry count | 2 times | Avoid task failure caused by temporary network fluctuations, while preventing data redundancy caused by repeated calls |
Three Common Misconfiguration Issues
- Symptom: Unable to view detailed execution logs for MCP service components, only overall workflow status is visible. Cause: Log collection switch was not enabled in workflow configuration, or log storage path was not configured for the node corresponding to
nodeId. - Symptom: Production workflows run several times slower than debug mode, with response times exceeding expectations. Cause: No reasonable timeout threshold was set, or single search limit was not restricted, causing the workflow to repeatedly call external data sources to pull redundant data.
- Symptom: The signature date field in the prompt is empty, and the current date is not displayed as required. Cause: The platform's built-in time variable was not called correctly, or no time variable mapping was added in the
variablesconfiguration.
How to Verify Correct Configuration
- Enter workflow debug mode, input simulated tender parameters, and check whether dynamic fields corresponding to
variablesare correctly populated. - Trigger an MCP service component call, view the node logs corresponding to the target
nodeId, and confirm that data pulling and execution results are normal. - Run the full workflow, and check whether the signature date of the generated document matches the current system date.
- Simulate multiple rounds of cross-data-source calls, and confirm that the workflow does not experience timeout or repeated call issues.
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 2026-10-19.