What the documents look like
Brand-owned stores are staffed and accounted for directly by the brand, so store operations are not managed through a franchise contract. That difference shapes which records this page routes: the inputs come from brand systems and brand staff rather than from franchisee reporting. The main data sources are the POS system, member CRM, ERP inventory and store inspections. The daily documents include daily sales reports, shift schedules, display photos and inventory transfer orders. Data update frequency is daily and weekly. In product information and selection questions, workflow routing has to connect fields from these documents to retrieval and interaction nodes so that a store manager or regional manager can obtain a checkable intermediate state when querying product information or raising a selection request.
The Form Input node is a user interaction node. When it is triggered, the conversation enters an interaction state and the workflow state is recorded; after the user completes the interaction, the workflow continues downward. After the user fills in the required information and submits, the node collects the submitted form information and passes it to later nodes. The User Selection node is also a user interaction node. When triggered, the conversation enters an interaction state; when the user makes a choice, the node evaluates that choice and executes the "yes" branch. These are existing node behaviors. They do not carry a global state-recording switch, a submission-count limit or automatic judgment capability.
Retrieval results do not carry authorization duties. Semantic recall and relevance scores do not perform permission or entity isolation. The same vector model is the precondition for two knowledge bases to be associated together; knowledge bases using different vector models cannot be associated together. Optional paths drawn in the overall workflow diagram do not mean every request executes all of them: image retrieval requires a corresponding image input and model capability, and reranking requires a model and must be enabled in settings. Order writes, document backfill and external status synchronization require a separate business interface or a later flow. Form-collected values by themselves do not complete business verification, approval or database writes.
Constraints at the workflow routing step
At this step the routing design has to keep three boundaries separate. The first is the boundary between interaction and state: the interaction state and the recorded workflow state belong to the interaction node itself, and no global state-recording switch should be assumed. The second is the boundary between collection and downstream use: the values collected by the Form Input node are passed to later nodes only when the routing explicitly hands them over, so each downstream retrieval, judgment or interface node has to be compared against the fields it actually receives. The third is the boundary between routing and business execution: order writes, document backfill and external status synchronization need a separate business interface or later flow, and a submitted form does not by itself complete verification, approval or a database write.
A hypothetical paper exercise sample is used below. The material text supplied for checking is: "Brand-owned store A submitted an inventory transfer order on 1 March 2025, requesting 20 spring knitwear items be transferred from store B to store A; the transfer order status is 'pending regional manager review'." The draft sentence to be assessed is: "The transfer order has been approved by the regional manager, and the product information can be updated to show the item as on sale at store A." The subject needed for judgment is brand-owned store A, the object is 20 spring knitwear items, the status is pending regional manager review, and the effective scope is the transfer order submitted on 1 March 2025. Approval and the on-sale update are not stated in the material.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Type | Relation to this page's documents |
|---|---|---|
| Form Input node | User interaction node | Enters interaction state when triggered, collects required information, passes it to later nodes after submission |
| User Selection node | User interaction node | Executes the corresponding "yes" branch after the user makes a choice; verify branch connections one by one |
| Interaction state check | Implementation check | The interaction state is a behavior of the interaction node; no separate global state-recording switch is set |
| Output handover check | Implementation check | Pass collected information explicitly to later retrieval, judgment or interface nodes; compare each output against its input |
| External operation division | Implementation check | Order writes, document backfill and external status synchronization require a separate business interface or later flow |
| Retrieval scope check | Implementation check | Verify knowledge base identifiers and vector model identifiers, exclude non-matching ones; different models cannot be associated together |
For this exercise, the assumed starting point is a Form Input node configured with two required fields (store number and product style number). The reason for choosing this number is that the sample's judgment subject and object each need one field to carry them, and this is compared with the number of fields the later nodes actually reference. This starting point is a hypothetical setting, not an official default value.
Three common errors
- Treating "pending regional manager review" as approval. The input is the sample material text; compare the transfer order status field against the value "approved"; the observable result should be that the status field remains pending review, and the phrase "has been approved" in the draft sentence is not supported.
- Treating a retrieval hit as authorization. The input is a product information retrieval request; compare the returned retrieval records against store A's authorization scope in the sample; the observable result should be that a retrieval hit does not constitute approval of the transfer order or confirmation of on-sale status at store A.
- Treating form submission as completed external synchronization. The input is the store number and product style number submitted at the Form Input node; compare the later node output against the ERP inventory or POS record; the observable result should be that the submitted values were passed on, while the external write status remains unknown and requires a separate interface to check.
How to verify the setup
- Against the sample material text and the draft sentence, check whether the draft sentence contains a status such as "has been approved" or "on sale" that the material does not state. If it does, judge it as unsupported and keep a record pending verification.
- Against the Form Input node, check whether the store number and product style number are collected as required fields and passed to later nodes after submission. Observe whether the later node input contains these two values; if they are missing, record an output handover gap.
- Against the User Selection node, check the target node connected to the "yes" branch. Using the transfer order status in the sample as input, observe whether the branch execution path matches the node's judgment logic; if the branch is not connected, record a configuration gap. For an empty-result handover, an explicit paper input of [] can be used to check the downstream design; it cannot be claimed that a fictional rule retrieval will necessarily return [].