What the documents look like
For operating reviews in Marketplace returns, this page examines FastGPT HTTP integrations. Refund-review requests keep applications, returned-goods receipt and credited refunds separate. The examples are hypothetical.
Constraints at the HTTP integrations step
Suppose a service summary says an application was received, a warehouse separately registered returned goods, and the current response omits a funds receipt. Check matter identity, address and method under the interface contract, then verify variables belong to this request. Successful authentication proves neither fund authority nor complete return of backend information. No actual refund amount is supplied, and credited funds are not inferred.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Refund-review HTTP | Proposed material | Inspection |
|---|---|---|
| Application received | Acceptance record | Not credited funds |
| Warehouse entry | Returned-goods event | Distinguish roles |
| Receipt omitted | Absent from response | No absent-event inference |
| Variable identity | Current service matter | Inspect passed input |
| Refund execution | Business system | Separate authority/receipt |
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
An accepted application reported as a completed refund needs fund evidence. Warehouse registration treated as buyer receipt of money needs event roles checked. An omitted receipt treated as no refund needs response scope and other real sources checked. These examine state, subject and missing-evidence inference.
How to verify the setup
Retain redacted requests, raw responses and answers. Align claims with actual field content instead of guessing meanings from labels. Mark unreviewed detail when only a summary is available, and assess debug identity under official limits. Added fund evidence changes that conclusion alone. Warehouse handling and refund execution remain with authorized business systems and processes. List the warehouse recipient and fund recipient separately instead of merging events with similar names.
| Material context | Scope |
|---|---|
| Document types | Refund Application, Return Logistics Order, Quality Inspection Photos and Refund Approval |
| Candidate sources | Platform After-Sales Backend, Customer Service Chat, WMS Receiving and Payment Refund Records |
| Technical baseline | FastGPT v4.17.2 |