What this category of data looks like
This category of data comes from defect management systems, test reports, code commit records, and user feedback. It is updated daily or per version release cycle. Daily produced documents include defect tickets, regression test checklists, repair verification records, and defect statistical reports. Document fields include defect ID, priority, reproduction steps, associated code commits, verification status, and more. There are no additional custom units. The core revolves around the full lifecycle flow of functional defects.
What constraints do these characteristics impose on the "forms and interactions" link
Dispersed data sources and update rhythms that follow version iterations require forms to support quick associated entry of multi-source data. Daily document fields are fixed and need to cover the full defect lifecycle, so interactions must preset standardized fields and not allow full customization. The risk of missing high-priority defects requires clear mandatory validation in the form priority determination step. The regression verification step needs to associate historical test cases, so interactions must support quick recall of existing regression checklist templates. Operation permissions for different roles must be distinguished through interactions to avoid cross-role misoperations affecting defect flow efficiency.
How to configure
| Configuration Item | Recommended Approach | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
Form input node formInput | Test example: Select 3 fields from defect management and regression test fields as mandatory inputs; actual fields are determined by the task | This node collects user input; missing mandatory items require checking interaction status to avoid subsequent nodes failing to obtain complete input |
User selection node userSelect | Test example: Set 2 business options and check the corresponding branches one by one | This node handles user selection; queries and filtering of defect management and regression test related records must be implemented by subsequent interfaces or external systems |
| Field passing after submission | Test example: Prepare 10 defect management and regression test input samples, covering complete filling, missing mandatory items, and canceled operations | Compare input and node output to verify whether subsequent nodes receive corresponding fields; result thresholds are determined by actual tasks |
| External implementation item: Regression test checklist invocation | Must be implemented separately by the external system; connect to external business systems via subsequent workflow nodes to obtain checklist data. It is recommended to load updated data from the external system from the last 7 days (to be tested) | Match the daily/per version update rhythm to reduce duplicate data entry workload |
| External implementation item: Multi-source data association | Must be implemented separately by the external system; associate via connecting to external code commit record systems via subsequent nodes | Connect to external data sources to simplify information entry during the repair verification phase |
| External implementation item: Role permission restriction | Must be implemented separately by the external system; implement role field editing permission restrictions via external business systems or subsequent workflow nodes | Distinguish operation boundaries for different roles to reduce misoperation risks |
Three common mistakes
- Phenomenon: After configuring dynamic knowledge base variables, the AI response does not display referenced documents, and the returned result is empty. Cause: The form input node did not correctly bind the parameter passing relationship between variables and the knowledge base search node, resulting in dynamic parameter values not taking effect.
- Phenomenon: A system error is triggered when submitting a defect ticket, prompting "Mandatory fields not filled in". Cause: The mandatory validation rule of the
formInputnode was not enabled, resulting in core information not being mandatory for entry. - Phenomenon: A timeout prompt appears when loading historical regression checklists. Cause: The number of historical data items loaded in a single time was not restricted, resulting in the external system returning too large a data volume exceeding the processing limit.
How to confirm the configuration is complete
- Submit a test defect ticket, check whether all preset mandatory fields have mandatory validation prompts, and confirm that the
formInputnode configuration is effective. - Switch accounts of different roles, check whether the field editing permissions of the external system or subsequent nodes take effect as configured, and confirm that the permission configuration is correct.
- Call the regression test checklist provided by the external system, check whether the corresponding template can be loaded, and confirm that the checklist invocation configuration is correct.
- Trigger a search after configuring dynamic knowledge base variables, check whether the variable transfer meets expectations, and confirm that the parameter binding is correct.
The values given 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 2026-10-19.