What This Type of Data Looks Like
This type of data is typically produced by product design and interaction design teams. Data sources include Figma or Axure prototype files, internal team design systems, review records, and usability test records. Daily documents include interactive prototype pages, page flowcharts, component specification documents, and review modification records. Update frequency is weekly or per version iteration. Document fields include page node identifiers, operation paths, component attributes, and version numbers. Metadata exported from different tools exhibits certain variations.
Constraints Imposed on Citation Sources and Traceability
Prototype and interaction design data is scattered across multiple tools and versioned files, with a high update frequency. Citation traceability requires precise matching of file versions and specific page nodes to avoid confusion between design content from different iteration versions. Document fields lack unified standard formats, so traceability requires retaining original metadata information, and standardized requirement document field mapping rules cannot be directly reused. Completion of abnormal scenarios and review modification records must be linked to specific operation paths. The traceability link must cover both design content and review change traces, which increases the complexity of multi-source data association.
Configuration Settings
| Configuration Item | Recommended Value | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
quoteMaxToken | 1000–1500 token | Matches the average character count of single-page prototype documents, avoids truncating critical operation path descriptions |
responseData | Includes file name, node ID, update time | Corresponds to the metadata fields of prototype files, meets the basic information requirements for traceability |
detail | Enabled | Displays associated nodes of review records, supplements traceability information for abnormal scenarios |
| Citation source sorting | Sorted in reverse order of file update time | Aligns with the version iteration logic of prototype design, prioritizes displaying the latest version content |
| Single recall limit | Top 3 entries | Prevents excessive redundant information from interfering with designers' review judgments |
Three Common Misconfiguration Issues
- Troubleshooting item: If the returned citation sources do not include the corresponding file name and node path, check whether the metadata return configuration for the
responseDataparameter was not correctly enabled. - Troubleshooting item: If the workflow can only recall content from a single prototype file and cannot reference multiple design system files simultaneously, check whether multi-source data source association rules were not configured, and only a single data source entry was bound.
- Troubleshooting item: If the returned citation sources are not the highest-ranked latest version content in the knowledge base, check whether the recall sorting rules were not configured according to the update frequency of prototype documents, and the default sorting logic does not match the version iteration habits of the design team.
How to Verify Successful Configuration
- Verify that the FastGPT server environment variables
AIPROXY_API_ENDPOINT(root address of the AI Proxy service, do not append paths such as /v1, not a single-model service address) andAIPROXY_API_TOKEN(AI Proxy administrator token, consistent with the AI Proxy server configuration and non-empty) are correctly configured, no startup verification errors occur, and the deployment requirements of FastGPT v4.17.0 are met. - Upload a test Axure prototype file, submit an associated review request, and confirm that returned results include metadata information such as file name and node ID.
- Adjust the value of the
quoteMaxTokenparameter, verify that the truncation logic of returned content meets expectations, and no critical operation paths are accidentally truncated. - Configure multi-source data sources, test the recall effect of simultaneously referencing multiple design system files, and confirm that no recall failures occur due to configuration conflicts.
Note: The configuration values provided here are common starting points. They should be evaluated against specific samples and use cases.
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.