What the documents look like
For procurement in Marketplace advertising, this page examines FastGPT HTTP integrations. Advertising-service procurement needs plans, actual execution and attribution definitions. A report’s existence does not establish delivered service, measured effects or a causal explanation of outcomes. The examples are hypothetical.
Constraints at the HTTP integrations step
Advertising-service procurement can read plans, keyword reports and attribution wording without budgets, outcome figures or real audience records. Proposed input lacks complete execution and transaction evidence. Inspect the actual service contract’s activity, period and coverage without assumed integration. An audience-package name establishes no personal permission, and attribution describes relationships rather than automatically proving causes. Preserve the source definition.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Procurement-reading check | Proposed material | Actual supporting evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Service execution | Plan separate from actual record | Not rewritten as delivered |
| Attribution meaning | Channel relationship separate from cause | Inspect definition and support |
| Activity period | Other-period report introduced | Check request and source time |
| Public scope | No outcome figures or real audience records | Inspect return against the contract |
| Formal acceptance | Separate approval, change and release | Reading is not effectiveness proof |
Documented conditions
| Documented item / implementation check | Condition |
|---|---|
Request address and method | The request address and method follow the external contract. |
Params and Headers | Inspect parameters, headers and authentication separately. |
| Body | Where a JSON body is used, validate its structure against the external contract. |
Variable references | Variables can come from global, system or upstream outputs. |
Debug identity fields | Test mode lacks chatId and responseChatItemId. |
Three common errors
Planned advertising described as delivered service needs current execution evidence. Assigned channel attribution treated as causation needs its definition and support. Another period’s report requires actual-request and source-time checks. These concern execution, explanatory scope and subject rather than a complete-looking report format.
How to verify the setup
Retain activity, definitions, actual input and return. Repeat with corresponding execution or transaction sources and keep conclusions bounded by evidence. Check headers, parameters and any appropriate body under the external contract without public credentials. Approval, advertising changes, writes or publication need actual authority and receipts. Reading establishes neither accepted service, generated growth nor completed attribution auditing.
| Material context | Scope |
|---|---|
| Document types | Advertising Plan, Keyword Report, Audience Package Description and Conversion Attribution Table |
| Candidate sources | Juliang Qianchuan, JD Kuaiche advertising, Alimama and Store Transaction Data |
| Technical baseline | FastGPT v4.17.2 |