This document applies to FastGPT v4.17.0. It explains forms and interactions within test cases and defect analysis for warranty period defect response workflows.
What This Category of Data Looks Like
Data for this category comes from customer-submitted warranty tickets, system operation logs, contractually agreed warranty terms, and software version release records. Daily produced documents include warranty tickets, defect confirmation sheets, repair records, and customer confirmation sheets. Fields include ticket number, defect occurrence scenario, responsibility boundary determination result, repair plan, and customer confirmation status. Data is updated daily or as each ticket progresses. There is no fixed statistical standard, so updates follow actual business workflows.
What Constraints These Characteristics Impose on Forms and Interactions
Data sources are scattered. Forms must support receiving multi-source field data from external systems or downstream nodes, or support manual entry to reduce manual input errors. Data is updated as each ticket progresses. Forms must support validating required field completeness on submission, to prevent submission when responsibility boundary determination or repair plan fields are incomplete. Daily documents include multiple types of records. Forms must support receiving associated document field data from external business systems, with acceptable defect scope limited by external logic. The most time-consuming links require external workflow branch configuration to enable step-by-step submission for responsible party selection and customer confirmation, to ensure process traceability. Business logic for responsible party selection and customer confirmation is implemented separately by external systems. The FastGPT form node only collects input information.
Configuration Settings
| Configuration Item | Recommended Approach | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
Form input node formInput | Test example: Select 3 fields from warranty period defect response fields as required inputs. Actual fields are determined per task | This node collects user input. Missing required fields must trigger interaction status checks, to prevent downstream nodes from receiving incomplete input |
User selection node userSelect | Test example: Set 2 business options, verify corresponding branches one by one | This node handles user selection. Querying and filtering records related to warranty period defect response must be implemented by downstream interfaces or external systems |
| Post-submission field passing | Test example: Prepare 10 warranty period defect response input samples, covering fully filled forms, missing required fields, and cancel operations | Compare input and node output to confirm whether downstream nodes receive corresponding fields. Result thresholds are determined per actual task |
| External implementation item: Form submission validation | Must be implemented separately by external systems. Set trigger timing to when all required fields are completed | Ensures no key process steps are missed |
| External implementation item: Timeout auto-save | Must be implemented separately by external systems. Implemented by external session management system, use 300 seconds as a starting point for actual testing | Prevents loss of entered content due to long periods of inactivity |
| External implementation item: Customer confirmation radio buttons | Must be implemented separately by external systems. Optional values are provided by external systems, node waits for user selection | Matches field requirements of customer confirmation sheets |
Three Common Mistakes
- Phenomenon: A form node in a workflow cannot be called by other branches, and cannot jump to the node after triggering. Verification steps: Check whether the workflow branch configuration correctly associates the form node, confirm the node is published and enabled.
- Phenomenon: After configuring external input guidance logic and specifying an external thesaurus address, a format error appears during debug preview. Verification steps: Check whether the external thesaurus address is accessible normally, confirm the thesaurus file format meets external system requirements.
- Phenomenon: A
quote type erroroccurs when referencing associated fields of warranty tickets. Verification steps: Check whether variable reference format meets FastGPT official documentation requirements, confirm parameter type matches the target field.
How to Confirm Configuration Is Complete
- Execute a single warranty ticket workflow test, enter corresponding fields, confirm the form can be submitted normally.
- Call an already configured other workflow branch, confirm it can jump to the form node, verify branch association works correctly.
- Configure external input guidance logic, enter content during debug preview, confirm no format errors occur.
- Reference associated variables for contract warranty terms, confirm no
quote type erroroccurs, verify variable reference works normally.
All provided configuration values are common starting points. Adjust them based on your own samples and testing.
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.