What the documents look like
Convenience-store fresh food is ordered by the store itself at high frequency against short shelf life, and it is not handled as a joint-operation revenue share the way a hypermarket fresh counter is. The main data sources are POS sales, the headquarters ordering system, store inventory, and cold-chain temperature records. The day-to-day documents are fresh-food order forms, damage/loss reports, near-expiry handling sheets, and temperature logs. These materials support product-information and selection questions in different ways: the order form carries item and quantity, the damage report and near-expiry sheet reflect loss and time limits, and the temperature log ties to cold-chain conditions. Data updates at daily and shift frequency, and records form around a single order or a single shift, so retrieval and question answering must be checked against the matching period and document scope.
Constraints at the workflow routing step
The Form Input node is a user-interaction node. When it triggers, the conversation enters an interaction state, the workflow state is recorded, and execution continues downward after the user completes the interaction. The User Selection node is also a user-interaction node: after the user makes a choice, the node evaluates that choice and runs the corresponding branch. Both nodes can be added repeatedly and trigger execution. Information collected must be passed explicitly to later retrieval, judgment, or interface nodes. Order writes, document backfill, and external status synchronization require a separate business interface or downstream process; retrieval and forms do not by themselves constitute authorized execution.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample: the source material reads, "Store A submitted a fresh-food order form on 10 March 2025, item: triangular rice ball, quantity: 20 pieces, requested delivery 11 March; the temperature log for the same day shows the refrigerated cabinet at 4 degrees Celsius, within the recorded range; the damage report records 2 triangular rice balls written off on 10 March for near-expiry." The draft sentence to be assessed is: "Store A's triangular rice ball order has completed approval and synced to the headquarters ordering system." That draft sentence asserts two facts, approval and synchronization, while the material records only submission and logging; it states no approval conclusion and no system synchronization status.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Setting or check content | Relation to this page's documents |
|---|---|---|
| Form Input node | Set required information fields; on submission, pass them to later nodes | Collects order-form subject, item, quantity, date |
| User Selection node | Configure selection branches; verify branch connections one by one | Selects a branch for the draft-sentence assessment result |
| Interaction-state check | Confirm the node enters the interaction state and records state after triggering | Confirms interaction-node behavior; no separate global switch is set |
| Output handoff check | Pass collected information explicitly to later retrieval or judgment nodes | Compare each output field against the input fields |
| Retrieval-scope check | Check the target retrieval scope and access rights | Confirm the material lies within an accessible scope |
| External-action separation | Order writes and synchronization attach to a separate business interface | Approval and synchronization do not complete automatically on form submission |
Hypothetical trial starting point: set the form required fields to item, quantity, and delivery date, because the sample material contains these three. Compare against the fields actually stated in the material; a missing field is recorded as pending verification and is not treated as a negative basis.
Three common errors
- Treating form submission as completed approval. The sample material records only submission; the draft sentence claims approval is complete. Input is the source material and the draft sentence; compare the approval-conclusion field. The material states no approval conclusion, so the claim is recorded as unsupported.
- Treating retrieval or the form as authorized execution. In the sample, order-form submission does not mean the headquarters system has synced. Input is the draft sentence and the material; compare the synchronization-status field. The material records no synchronization entry, so the point is pending verification.
- Extending interaction-state recording into a global state switch. The documentation states only that an interaction node records workflow state after triggering. Input is the node description and the draft sentence; compare whether a global-switch description appears. A draft sentence claiming such a switch exists does not match the documentation.
How to verify the setup
- Input the sample source material and the draft sentence; compare whether the approval and synchronization fields in the draft sentence have corresponding statements in the material. When the material states nothing, record the point as unsupported, not as a denial.
- Input the User Selection node branch configuration; compare whether the corresponding branch runs after the user makes a choice. Verify branch connections one by one and observe whether the branch direction matches the configuration.
- Input the form required-field settings; compare whether submitted information passes to later nodes. Observe whether the fields received by later nodes match the fields filled in the form. For empty-result handoff, a paper input of [] can be used to check the downstream design; this does not claim that retrieval will necessarily return [].