This document is written based on FastGPT v4.17.0.
Data Characteristics for This Use Case
Data for this use case primarily originates from story scripts during game development, game text and art assets prepared before launch and during version updates, and publicly available compliance requirements released by regulators. Daily produced documents include content self-inspection forms, sensitive content modification records, user agreements, and compliance review minutes. Data updates follow the rhythm of game versions or operational activities, with no fixed cycle. Updates must be synchronized in real time alongside version iterations and content adjustments, covering all original materials and output records required for multi-type compliance checks of text and art assets.
Constraints on Workflow Orchestration
Game content compliance self-inspection documents are updated alongside version iterations. Workflows must support triggering at version nodes to avoid mixing data across versions. Data sources include multi-modal text and art content. Workflows must support multi-type input nodes to handle text compliance verification and art compliance recognition separately. Compliance documents require retention of review minutes and modification records. Workflows must include an automatic archiving link associated with self-inspection data for the corresponding version. Regulatory requirements adjust dynamically over time. Workflows must provide parameter update entrances to adapt to compliance standard changes across different stages. They must also support multi-role permission configuration to protect the confidentiality of compliance documents.
Configuration Settings
| Configuration Item | Recommended Setting | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Trigger Condition | Trigger by version number / activity ID | Adapt to the rhythm of data updates by version or activity for this use case, ensuring compliance checks only run for the current version |
| Node Flow Rules | Text verification node → art verification node → review and archive node, bind nodeId to specify node order | Match the compliance check sequence of text first then art for this use case, clarifying the execution link for each stage |
variables | Bind version number, self-inspection form ID, reviewer ID | Associate compliance data for the corresponding version to avoid cross-version confusion, and record review-related information |
| Failure Retry Strategy | Retry 2 times, 60-second interval | Address temporary interface fluctuations or data loading delays, ensuring check processes do not interrupt |
| Archiving Path | Store classified by version number | Facilitate subsequent compliance reviews and data tracing, enabling quick location of self-inspection documents for the corresponding version |
| Permission Control | Only compliance team members can edit node configurations | Protect the confidentiality of compliance documents, preventing unauthorized personnel from modifying check rules |
Three Common Misconfigurations
- When reusing form fill nodes in a workflow, cross-branch jumps to that node are not possible. This occurs because flow conditions between nodes are not configured, and only fixed-link node calls are allowed.
- Workflow API calls return empty values. This occurs because required compliance check parameters are not bound in
variables, preventing the workflow from triggering and executing. - A
quote type erroroccurs when configuring variable references. This occurs because variable formats are not converted to string types required by the node, and non-text format parameters are passed directly.
How to Verify Proper Configuration
- Trigger a test version workflow, check that each node runs in the preset sequence: text verification → art verification → review and archive.
- Call the workflow API, verify that the returned results include core fields for compliance checks, with no empty values.
- Attempt cross-branch calls to the form fill node, confirm that the link can jump normally to the target node.
- Check files in the archiving path, confirm that compliance self-inspection documents are stored classified by version number.
Note: The values provided are common starting points and should be evaluated against the user’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.