What the Data for This Category Looks Like
Data for this category primarily comes from Figma or Axure files, internal team design systems, user feedback, and usability test records. Daily output documents include interactive prototypes, page flowcharts, component descriptions, and review records. Data fields cover page node hierarchy, jump logic, component interaction rules, review modification comments, and more. Update frequency is typically weekly or per version release cycle. Document structure for different projects adjusts slightly based on business complexity.
What Constraints These Characteristics Impose on the "Workflow Orchestration" Link
Data sources for this category are scattered, including multiple types of unstructured or semi-structured content such as design tool files and user feedback. Workflows must support multi-source data pulling and integration. Data updates occur frequently, so workflows must adapt to version iteration rhythms to avoid design deviations caused by outdated data. There are no unified mandatory standards for document fields. Workflows need to configure field validation rules to ensure accurate transmission of interaction logic and component information. Additionally, a large number of abnormal scenarios from daily review modifications must be handled. Workflows must support branch flow and state synchronization.
How to Set the Configurations
| Configuration Item | Recommended Approach | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
variables | Bind design document fields to workflow input and output | Adapt to field transfer requirements for prototyping and interaction design, ensure review comments and interaction logic can flow across modules |
nodeId | Bind to Figma/Axure page node IDs | Accurately locate configuration information for corresponding interactive prototypes, avoid confusion across pages |
| Keyword extraction rules | Split and extract by entity type (date, city, action) | Extract interaction scenario keywords from user feedback or review records, adapt to requirements drafting needs |
| Workflow timeout threshold | 300–600 seconds | Adapt to the time required for design file pulling and parsing, avoid process interruptions caused by large file parsing |
| Context window configuration | First 1000–1500 characters | Retain core interaction logic and review comments, avoid interference from redundant information on workflow processing |
| MCP tool parameter binding | Associate with global variables to transfer parameters | Adapt to parameter transfer requirements of the latest version toolset, comply with FastGPT v4.17.0 function specifications |
Three Common Errors
- Phenomenon: After referencing multiple knowledge bases in the workflow, node information from interactive prototypes is repeatedly concatenated. Cause: No deduplication logic for multi-source data is configured, causing identical nodes from different design tools to be pulled repeatedly.
- Phenomenon: The workflow cannot extract keyword variables such as departure date and city from user feedback or review records, and the extraction result is empty. Cause: The entity recognition rules for
variablesare not correctly configured, and the required field types are not specified. - Phenomenon: Global variables set in the workflow cannot be called in subsequent nodes, and an undefined variable prompt appears during execution. Cause:
nodeIdis not bound to the global variable scope configuration, causing variables to only take effect in the current node.
How to Confirm the Configuration Is Complete
- Upload a test Figma or Axure file, trigger the workflow, check if the pulled node information includes correct page hierarchy and interaction logic.
- Input test text containing dates and cities, run the keyword extraction module, check if target fields can be extracted correctly.
- Configure global variables and bind them to MCP tool input parameters, run the workflow, check if the tool call can normally obtain variable values.
- View workflow logs, confirm that the timeout threshold is not triggered, and the flow status of all nodes meets expectations.
The values provided here 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.