What the documents look like
Brand member operations in the private-domain channel works from four document families: member tag tables, outreach plans, coupon rules, and privacy authorization records. These sit alongside data from a CRM system, enterprise WeCom, POS purchase records, and mini-program behavior data. The category difference from direct-store operations is that this work concerns customer data and repeat-purchase outreach, and does not handle store scheduling. The supplied brief gives daily and weekly update frequencies; this page does not infer batch synchronization or real-time triggers from those two values. For deployment and upgrade work, the authorization state recorded in these four document families at handover determines which operations may proceed and which requests remain pending review.
Constraints at the upgrades step
During an upgrade window, old-version and new-version instances may coexist, so each permission state in the handover material needs item-by-item confirmation. The version note states that the historical chunk training task migration and the knowledge base rebuild status migration are both manually triggered tasks that do not block service startup, and should be executed only after confirming that all old-version FastGPT App and Pro instances in the cluster have fully stopped and old task leases have expired. Retrieval capability does not carry authorization responsibility; a similarity score is not a permission or entity filter. Forms collect field values; business verification, approval, database writes, and external synchronization each need their own downstream implementation.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample: a brand CRM team submits a handover request inside an upgrade window. The material text reads: "Member tag table V3 was submitted by the operations group to the shared directory on 1 October 2026, status pending review; outreach plan TP-1024 is linked to tag table V3, with a planned effective date of 15 October 2026; the privacy authorization record for this member batch covers SMS outreach and does not include WeCom outreach." The proposed determination sentence reads: "This handover request has obtained operations group authorization and may execute WeCom outreach." On comparison, the material records only a pending-review status for the tag table, the outreach plan effective date has not yet arrived, and the privacy authorization scope does not include WeCom outreach. The authorization and execution conditions claimed by the proposed sentence are not supported by the material.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Hypothetical starting value for this exercise | Reason for selection and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
AIPROXY_API_ENDPOINT | http://aiproxy:3000 | The document requires the AI Proxy root address without an appended chat interface path; compare against a single-model custom address, which the document states cannot substitute |
AIPROXY_API_TOKEN | Hypothetical 32-character random string | The document requires a non-empty value consistent with the server side; compare against an empty value, which the document states causes startup validation to fail |
PRO_TOKEN | Hypothetical 32-character random string | The document requires App and Admin values to match; compare character by character against the App-side value |
DEFAULT_TEAM_BASIC_PERMISSIONS_ENABLED | false | The document states this value does not affect existing teams; compare against the actual permission behavior of teams created after the upgrade |
SYNC_MEMBER_CRON | Empty | The document states an empty value means the synchronization task does not start; compare against the behavior when a Cron expression is present |
CHECK_INTERNAL_IP | false | The document states this applies only to user- or workflow-controlled outbound URLs; compare against deployer-configured service addresses |
These values are hypothetical starting points for this exercise and are not official defaults.
Three common errors
- Treating a "pending review" status in the material as granted authorization and proceeding with an outreach operation. The input is the tag table status field; the comparison is between "pending review" and "reviewed"; the observable result is the actual value of the status field.
- Treating the outreach plan effective date as already effective. The input is the plan effective date; the comparison is between the current date and the effective date; the observable result is the ordering of the two dates.
- Extending the SMS outreach scope in the privacy authorization record to cover WeCom outreach. The input is the authorization scope field; the comparison is between the authorization scope and the channel to be executed; the observable result is whether the channel falls inside the authorization scope.
How to verify the setup
- Input the material text and the proposed determination sentence from the hypothetical sample, and compare the "pending review" status against the "authorization obtained" wording. The proposed sentence is supported only when the material explicitly records that review has passed; the current material shows only pending review, so the sentence is not supported.
- Input the effective date of outreach plan TP-1024, 15 October 2026, and the current date, and compare their ordering. The plan enters the executable range only when the current date is not earlier than the effective date; the current date is earlier than the effective date, so the execution condition is not met.
- Input the authorization scope "SMS outreach" from the privacy authorization record and the channel to be executed, "WeCom outreach", and compare whether the two are consistent. The channel operation is supported by authorization only when the channel falls inside the authorization scope; the current scope does not include WeCom outreach, so the request must be recorded as an evidence gap.