What the documents look like
Brand dealer ordering events run on a quarterly and annual rhythm. The working materials are the ordering handbook, the ordering contract, the sample list and the credit approval record, and these four document types carry the inventory procurement and supplier data for the event. The ordering event system, historical sales, dealer inventory and financial credit form the main data sources, while the channel department, regional dealers and merchandise planning take part together. Inventory procurement and supplier data frequently need to be exchanged with external systems, and the HTTP module is the component that sends a request to a given address and parses the response. The material update frequency is quarterly and annual. This page does not derive batch synchronization, full synchronization or real-time trigger behavior from that frequency.
Two characteristics shape the work on this page. First, the event is a reservation exercise for offline dealers rather than a platform store matrix, so the documents record intended purchase quantities, sample identities and credit positions rather than live store listings. Second, the credit approval record and the ordering contract sit at different business stages: a submitted form, an unsigned approval record and an executed contract are three separate facts, and the HTTP integration must not treat one as another.
Constraints at the HTTP integrations step
The HTTP module can be added repeatedly, is configured manually, and executes when triggered. It sends an HTTP request to the corresponding address, and its operation resembles direct-call tools such as Postman and ApiFox.
Params are path request parameters and are used mostly in GET requests. Body is the request body and is used mostly in POST and PUT requests. Headers are request headers, used to carry special information. All three kinds of data can reference variables through {{}}, and the URL can also reference variables. Variables come from global variables, system variables and preceding node outputs.
The system variables are appId, chatId, responseChatItemId, variables, cTime and histories. The chatId and responseChatItemId values do not exist in test mode. The histories variable takes at most 10 records by default, and that length cannot be modified.
Return values are configured to parse the interface response, extracting values through JSON path syntax. Output formatting was added after v4.6.8; when the output type is set to string, the value of the corresponding key is converted into a JSON string.
The chat interface uses APIKey authentication. When calling chat/completions, passing body.appId in the request body is recommended. For compatibility with the OpenAI SDK, Authorization: Bearer <apiKey>-<appId> is also supported, and body.appId is then not required. The appId priority order is body.appId, then <apiKey>-<appId>, then the appId associated with the apikey. Some SDKs need a v1 path in the BaseUrl and some do not; if a 404 appears, adding v1 can be retried. The model, temperature and similar parameter fields passed in have no effect, because those are determined by the orchestration. To proxy team member identity through authProxy, the team owner must enable authProxy when creating or editing the key, and the proxied identity still needs permission on the target application and conversation; this applies to FastGPT v4.15.0 and above.
When a workflow contains an interactive node, the returned interactive object is a display configuration containing only type and params. Internal runtime fields such as entryNodeIds, memoryEdges, nodeOutputs and nodeResponseId are not returned. Form input requires the object to be serialized into a string and passed as the messages value, and the chatId must stay consistent.
These are existing node behaviors and configurable fields. Business approval, database writes and external synchronization are business actions that need separate downstream implementation.
Configuration and implementation checks
Hypothetical paper exercise sample: the source text reads "East China region 2024 autumn ordering event sample list (number YP-2024Q3-018) registers 12 samples, corresponding to ordering handbook version H2, credit approval record not yet signed." The draft sentence to be assessed is "This dealer has completed credit approval and may submit the ordering contract." The table below lists official documented settings or implementation checks relevant to this feature, organized around that sample.
| Configuration item | Hypothetical starting point for this exercise | Reason and comparison object |
|---|---|---|
| Request address and method | Fill in according to the external interface document; the address may reference variables through {{}} | Compare item by item with the path and method in the external interface contract |
| Params and Headers | Fill in request parameters and request headers separately; inject authentication credentials through secure configuration | Compare with the field names and values declared in the external interface document |
| Body | Use only under the corresponding request type; check the JSON structure against the external contract | Compare with the field types in the external interface contract |
| Variable references | Check global variables, system variables and preceding node outputs one by one | Compare with the actual passed values and confirm the reference source exists |
| Return value parsing | Configure keys according to JSON path syntax | Compare with the structure of the interface response example |
| Debug identity fields | chatId and responseChatItemId do not exist in test mode | Compare with the actual values in business operation; do not treat debug empty values as a business fault |
Three common errors
- Treating retrieval or a form as authorization execution. In the sample, the credit approval record is not yet signed, and the draft sentence states that credit approval is completed, which treats an unsigned state as effective. A form collecting values does not produce an approval result.
- Treating the display configuration returned by an interactive node as the complete runtime state. The interactive object contains only type and params. If business judgment is based on fields such as entryNodeIds or memoryEdges, the input is missing.
- Treating a similarity score or retrieval result as the basis for permission or entity isolation. The score is a relevance number and cannot determine whether a dealer holds ordering or credit permission.
How to verify the setup
- Input the sample source text and the draft sentence, and compare whether "credit approval record not yet signed" and "credit approval completed" refer to the same subject, the same period and the same field. The two values are mutually exclusive, so the draft sentence is unsupported and the evidence gap remains.
- Input a request containing an interactive node with detail=true, and compare whether the returned interactive object contains only type and params. The expectation is met when internal fields such as entryNodeIds do not appear; when they do appear, record the actual observation.
- Input a test mode request from the sample in which chatId is empty and responseChatItemId is empty, and compare the system variable values. The absence of both values is the documented test mode behavior and is not judged as a business fault.