What the data for this category looks like
Core data for user acceptance testing support scenarios comes from requirement specification documents, test environment operation records, client business sample materials, and defect management systems. Daily produced documents include UAT test cases, acceptance issue tickets, acceptance reports, and signed confirmation forms. Data fields include test case number, test scenario, defect severity, acceptance conclusion, signatory, and other relevant fields. The update rhythm is once per project phase or per software version, with no fixed high-frequency update requirements.
What constraints these characteristics impose on the scheduled tasks and automation link
Since data sources involve multiple systems and documents, scheduled tasks must support cross-data source pulling and associated matching of corresponding fields. The update rhythm per phase or version requires task trigger frequency to match project cycles, to avoid excessive pulling of redundant data. Fixed document structures require automated summaries to strictly align with the format and fields of UAT acceptance reports, enabling direct review by business representatives. The signed confirmation link requires summary results to retain traceable execution records, to avoid data tampering risks.
How to configure settings
| Configuration Item | Recommended Setting | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Task trigger frequency | Follow version release cycle (e.g., every 7 days) | Matches the update rhythm of UAT data per phase/version, avoids repeated pulling of old data |
| Data source association rules | Bind test case ID and defect number fields | Corresponds to the field characteristics of UAT test cases and defect systems, ensures accurate data association |
| Summary document generation format | Markdown format categorized by business module | Matches the document structure of UAT acceptance reports, facilitates review by business representatives |
| Exception alert threshold | Trigger alert after 3 consecutive task execution failures | Avoids false alarms from temporary network fluctuations, while timely detecting long-term abnormalities |
| Data pulling scope | Only pull test data for the current version | Corresponds to the version-based update feature of UAT data, avoids mixing in historical redundant data |
| Result output path | Bind project-specific shared directory | Matches the daily document storage habits of implementation consultants and test managers, enables quick access |
Three Common Configuration Mistakes
- Summary document fields are empty after task execution. The cause is incorrect configuration of data source association rules, failure to bind matching fields for test case ID and defect number, resulting in inability to associate and integrate cross-data source data.
- Only the first dozen or so entries are processed during bulk test data pulling. The cause is failure to restrict data pulling scope to the current version, mixing in redundant data from historical versions leading to task execution timeout and interruption, corresponding to the scenario where only preceding batch entries process normally.
- No acceptance report is generated after scheduled task triggers. The cause is failure to specify an output format matching the UAT document structure, resulting in generated file formats that do not meet business review requirements and are judged as invalid output by the system.
How to Confirm Correct Configuration
- A scheduled task using FastGPT v4.17.0 is manually triggered, and the generated summary document is checked to confirm it is categorized by business module and includes corresponding fields of UAT test cases and acceptance issue tickets.
- Task execution logs are reviewed to confirm that data source association rules are active, and all pulled data matches the test scope of the current version.
- A task execution failure scenario is simulated to check whether the preset exception alert is triggered.
- The result output path is checked to confirm that generated documents have been correctly saved to the specified project-specific shared directory.
The values provided are common starting points and should be measured against the sample data relevant to the specific deployment.
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.