What the documents look like
This page covers the HTTP integration step for retail plastic bag and single-use item reporting during order fulfilment and after-sales question handling. The category centres on single-use plastic product reporting and environmental supervision, with data coming from the Ministry of Commerce reporting system, POS plastic bag sales, procurement systems, and store ledgers. The recurring documents are procurement ledgers, sales vouchers, semi-annual reports, and self-discipline commitments. Update frequency is semi-annual and daily.
In this task, an external interface receives store-submitted procurement ledgers, sales vouchers, or report-progress queries and returns a business status that can be checked. The interface carries materials and requests. It does not constitute authorisation, approval, or completed submission.
A hypothetical drill sample is used throughout. On 10 March 2025, a supermarket headquarters compliance role prepared a store procurement ledger. The ledger text reads: "Between 1 January 2025 and 30 June 2025, Store XX procured a cumulative 12,000 single-use plastic bags, of which 8,000 were degradable material and 4,000 were ordinary plastic, procurement voucher number CG-2025-0310." A draft sentence proposed for a semi-annual report reads: "In the first half of the year, the store's single-use plastic bag usage was fully recycled, with a recycling rate of 100%." The question to decide is whether the draft sentence matches the ledger text. The ledger records procurement quantity and material classification only. It records no usage quantity and no recycling quantity, so the usage figure and recycling rate in the draft sentence have no corresponding data in the source text. That state is unsupported and requires usage and recycling records before checking.
Constraints at the HTTP integrations step
The HTTP module sends a request to a target address. Params carry path request parameters, Body carries the request body for POST/PUT requests, and Headers carry special information. All three data types and the URL can reference variables through {{}}. Variables come from global variables, system variables, and preceding node outputs.
System variables include appId, chatId, responseChatItemId, variables, cTime, and histories. The chatId and responseChatItemId values do not exist in test mode. An empty value in a test environment is a documented condition, and it does not establish a business fault.
Return values are configured by extracting interface response values through JSON path syntax. Output formatting after v4.6.8 converts the value at a configured key into a JSON string when the output type is string. The chat interface supports a detail parameter that returns intermediate values; in stream mode these are distinguished through event, and in non-stream mode the result is stored in responseData. Plugin-type applications default to detail mode, pass input through variables, and expose output through pluginOutput.
Retrieval and similarity do not carry permission or entity-isolation duties. Before calling the interface, confirm whether the caller holds permission for the target application and session. A relevance score is not a category, entity, or permission filter.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Hypothetical starting point for this drill | Reason and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| Request address | Entered from the external interface document, may reference a variable | The address comes from the interface document; compare it character by character with the path stated there |
| Request method | POST used to submit the ledger query | Compare with the method declared in the interface document; adjust when they differ |
| Headers | Authorisation credential injected through secure configuration | Compare with the authentication method required by the interface document; credentials are not written into public samples |
| Body structure | JSON constructed from ledger fields | Compare field by field with the interface contract, checking field names and types |
| Variable reference | References ledger fields from preceding node output | Compare with the actual node output value, checking whether the passed value is empty |
| Return value extraction | Key configured by JSON path | Compare with the interface response structure, checking whether the extraction path matches |
Three common errors
- Treating the absence of chatId and responseChatItemId in test mode as missing business data. The documents state that test mode does not produce these two values. Checking should separate the test environment from the production environment and must not conclude that fulfilment or after-sales records are lost.
- Treating the usage quantity and recycling rate in the draft sentence as facts already supported by the ledger. The ledger text records procurement quantity and material only. Usage quantity and recycling quantity belong to other fields and require a separate source check; when not stated, record the state as pending verification.
- Treating a similarity score or retrieval result returned by the interface as a permission decision. Similarity does not carry entity or permission filtering. Before calling the interface, confirm the caller holds permission for the target application and session. A retrieval result does not replace authorisation.
How to verify the setup
- Enter the ledger text and the draft sentence from the hypothetical sample. Compare the usage quantity and recycling rate fields in the draft sentence against the procurement quantity and material fields in the ledger text. Observe whether the draft sentence presents values not stated in the source text. When a draft value has no counterpart in the source, record it as unsupported.
- Enter a pending semi-annual report request. Compare the store entity, period scope, and authorisation status in the request. Observe whether the request falls inside the authorised scope. When the request exceeds the authorised scope, record it as pending confirmation and do not execute submission.
- Enter an interface call in test mode. Compare whether the returned chatId and responseChatItemId are empty. Observe whether the result matches the documented test-mode condition. When both are empty and the call is in test mode, record it as a documented condition and do not judge it a fault.