What the documents look like
Category access work happens before listing or onboarding. The objects under review are the operating entity and its authorization chain, not storefront ratings or post-sale service records. The materials are a business license, a trademark registration certificate, a brand authorization chain, and any industry license required for the category. During inventory procurement and supplier data handling, these documents must be matched to procurement records and passed to an external system through an interface call.
Two properties of these materials shape the interface work. First, qualification documents carry an entity identity and a scope of authorization, while procurement records carry quantities and batch information. These are different fields and cannot substitute for one another. Second, qualification data is refreshed irregularly, with a fresh collection at each onboarding, and interface calls are triggered per handover rather than on a fixed schedule. An interface call confirms that a request was sent and a response was received. Qualification verification, access approval, database writes, and external synchronization require separate downstream implementation. Retrieval and similarity scores do not act as permission or entity filters.
Constraints at the HTTP integrations step
The HTTP module sends a request to a configured address. Params carry path parameters and are common in GET requests. Body carries the request payload and is common in POST and PUT requests. Headers carry request headers. All three can reference variables through {{}}, and the URL can also reference a variable. Variables come from global variables, system variables, and upstream node outputs. System variables include appId, chatId, responseChatItemId, variables, cTime, and histories. In test mode, chatId and responseChatItemId do not exist, so a missing value for those fields in test mode is a known condition of that mode rather than a business fault.
Return values are extracted with JSON path syntax. When the output type is set to string, the value at the corresponding key is converted to a JSON string before output. The API key usage rules for the chat interface state that appId priority follows body.appId, then <apiKey>-<appId>, then the appId associated with the key in the older adaptation. The model and temperature fields passed to the chat interface have no effect because the orchestration determines them. When detail is set to true, intermediate values are returned, and in non-stream mode they are stored in responseData. The interface does not return the actual consumed token value; detail=true exposes the tokens field inside responseData for manual calculation.
Hypothetical exercise sample. A supplier submits a business license naming the entity “Sample City Chenxing Trading Co., Ltd.”, with the unified social credit code field left blank on the material. A trademark registration certificate names the registrant as “Sample City Chenxing Trading Co., Ltd.” and lists Class 25 within the approved scope of use. A brand authorization chain document names the licensor as the trademark registrant and the licensee as “Sample City Chenxing Trading Co., Ltd.”, with an authorization period from 1 January 2025 to 31 December 2025. The draft sentence to be judged reads: “This supplier has complete qualifications, can be admitted to Class 25, and is synchronized to the procurement system.” Review points: the business license entity and the authorization chain licensee match, and the trademark registrant matches. The unified social credit code is not stated, which is an evidence gap. The authorization period must cover the date of the proposed procurement batch. Whether the interface synchronization was executed has no authorization statement.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Hypothetical starting point for this exercise | Reason and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| Request address and method | Fill in according to the external interface document; the address references a provided variable | Compare the address and method against the external contract; the method matches the business action |
| Headers authentication | Inject credentials through secure configuration | Compare against the authentication method declared in the interface document; do not write credentials into public samples |
| Body structure | Declare JSON fields according to the external interface contract | Compare field by field against the interface document; Body takes effect only under the corresponding request type |
| Variable references | Reference global variables, system variables, and upstream node outputs | Check each actual passed value against the corresponding material field |
| Return extraction | Extract required fields with JSON path | Compare against the interface response structure; the string output type triggers formatted output |
| Debug identity fields | chatId and responseChatItemId do not exist in test mode | Compare against a formal call; do not treat a debug empty value as a business fault |
Three common errors
- Treating a successful interface response as access approval. The input is the HTTP response; the comparison object is the qualification verification and access approval records; the observable result is whether each of those records exists separately. A successful response does not create an approval fact.
- Using a similarity score to exclude unrelated suppliers. The input is the score returned by retrieval; the comparison object is the supplier entity identifier and the authorized scope; the observable result is whether exclusion follows an identifier match. A score does not perform entity or permission filtering.
- Treating an empty chatId in test mode as an interface fault. The input is a test-mode call; the comparison object is the chatId returned by a formal call; the observable result is the presence state of that field in test mode. An empty value is a known condition of that mode.
How to verify the setup
- For the blank unified social credit code in the sample business license, input the material text and the draft sentence “complete qualifications”; compare the fields actually stated in the material against the assertion in the draft; observe whether the draft sentence exceeds what the material supports. An unstated field should be recorded as a gap.
- For the authorization period from 1 January 2025 to 31 December 2025 and the proposed procurement batch date, input both; compare the coverage relationship between the period and the batch date; observe whether the batch date falls inside the interval. A date outside the interval means the authorization chain does not cover that batch.
- For the phrase “synchronized to the procurement system” in the draft sentence, input the interface response and the downstream write record; compare the response fields against the actual record in the procurement system; observe whether a corresponding downstream record exists. When only a response exists and no write record is present, the synchronization status remains unsupported.