An operations assistant is redesigning a recurring data-processing workflow step to use Code Execution. Which two design decisions best promote reliable integration?
Choose two A Vary the input file format from run to run to accommodate the different source systems that supply the data each week. B Define a brief output verification step in which the human reviewer confirms the computed result against an expected range or sanity check before the output advances to downstream consumers. C Embed the Code Execution step inside the workflow without documenting the expected output format or the fields it produces. D Standardize the input file format the step expects, so each run of the Code Execution step receives consistent input and produces comparable, verifiable output across recurring weekly cycles. E Eliminate the human review step that follows Code Execution, since the sandboxed environment already verifies that the code ran without errors. Show Answer Answer Explanation Recurring automated processing is most reliable when each execution receives a consistent input structure, allowing outputs to be compared and verified across cycles. Successful code execution only establishes that the code ran; it does not establish that the computed result is valid for the business context. A human reviewer’s expected-range or sanity check provides a control before downstream consumers receive the output.
Community Discussion