What the documents look like
Multi-warehouse allocation happens at the order routing stage and determines which warehouse ships an order. This differs from the courier handover step, which occurs later. The documents handled day to day include allocation rules, inventory synchronization tables, transfer orders, and out-of-stock alerts. Data sources include the WMS, OMS, ERP inventory, and platform inventory interfaces, with update frequency at daily or hourly intervals. Supply chain planning, WMS administrators, and e-commerce operations all take part. Errors at this stage lead to oversell refunds, higher cross-region freight, or delayed shipment.
Product information and selection questions must describe the implementation conditions, document differences, and verification steps for workflow routing around these documents. The form input node and the user selection node are the two interaction nodes relevant to this task. When either node triggers, the conversation enters an interaction state, the workflow state is recorded, and execution continues after the user completes the interaction. The form input node collects required information the user submits and passes it to downstream nodes. The user selection node evaluates the user's choice and executes the corresponding "yes" branch. The recorded interaction state is a behavior of the interaction nodes; no separate global state-recording switch is documented. Collected information must be explicitly passed to downstream retrieval, judgment, or interface nodes, and outputs must be compared item by item against inputs. Order writes, document backfill, and external status synchronization require a separate business interface or subsequent process. Retrieval and forms do not constitute authorized execution.
Constraints at the workflow routing step
A hypothetical drill sample is used here. A supply chain planning department writes in an allocation rules document: "The East China warehouse takes priority for Jiangsu orders; sellable inventory is based on the most recent synchronization result." A transfer order records: "Wuxi warehouse transfers 200 units to Suzhou warehouse; status is pending review." A draft sentence reads: "The transfer order has taken effect, and Suzhou warehouse sellable inventory increases by 200 units." The request to be judged is: "Based on the above materials, confirm the current sellable inventory of Suzhou warehouse." The source text contains a subject, an object, and a status. The draft sentence and the request must be compared item by item.
The interaction state records workflow state while waiting for user interaction. It does not produce business writes during that wait. A pending review status is not an approval, an offered option is not execution, and an unsigned termination is not a completed termination. The transfer order status field in the sample shows "pending review"; the draft sentence asserts "has taken effect." These are mutually exclusive values on the same field, so the draft sentence is unsupported by the source text. The request asks for a sellable inventory figure, but the materials do not state a sellable inventory quantity for Suzhou warehouse. That remains an evidence gap, and no definite inventory conclusion can be given.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Relevant setting or check on this page | Correspondence to the sample |
|---|---|---|
| Form input node | Enters interaction state on trigger, collects required information, passes it downstream after submission | Used to collect warehouse and product information for selection questions |
| User selection node | Executes the corresponding "yes" branch after the user chooses; verify branch connections one by one | Used for allocation priority or handling path selection |
| Output handoff check | Explicitly pass collected information to downstream retrieval, judgment, or interface nodes | Check whether the draft sentence is mistaken for an effective fact |
| Interaction state check | State recording is a behavior of interaction nodes; no separate global state switch | Confirm no business write occurs while waiting for user interaction |
| External operation separation | Order writes, document backfill, and external status synchronization require a separate business interface | Transfer order status change and inventory update are not completed inside these nodes |
The hypothetical starting point for this drill is: use "pending review" as the comparison value for the transfer order status field and compare it with "has taken effect." The reason for choosing this value is that the field appears explicitly in the sample source text. The comparison method is a character-by-character check of the same field's value.
Three common errors
- Treating the transfer order's "pending review" status as effective. Input: the sample transfer order source text. Comparison: the draft sentence's "has taken effect." Observable result: the two values differ on the same status field.
- Treating form submission as an inventory update. Input: the warehouse and product information collected by the form input node. Comparison: the actual record of Suzhou warehouse sellable inventory. Observable result: the form output contains no inventory write result.
- Treating a user selection branch as authorized execution. Input: the "yes" branch of the user selection node. Comparison: the transfer order signature or approval record. Observable result: branch execution produces no signature or effective fact.
How to verify the setup
- Input the sample source text "Wuxi warehouse transfers 200 units to Suzhou warehouse; status is pending review" and the draft sentence "the transfer order has taken effect." Compare the values of the same status field. If the values differ, the draft sentence is judged unsupported.
- Input the request to be judged, "Based on the above materials, confirm the current sellable inventory of Suzhou warehouse." Compare whether the materials state a sellable inventory figure. If no figure is stated, record it as an evidence gap and give no definite inventory conclusion.
- Input an explicit paper empty result [] to check the downstream design. Observe whether the downstream node handles the empty result through its branch. Do not claim that a fictional rule retrieval necessarily returns []. Libraries across different vector models cannot be associated together; check identifiers first and exclude those that do not match, then record the actual observation.