What the documents look like
Near-expiry markdown handling manages the shelf-life lifecycle of store inventory. This is a different operating shape from weighed picking, where each order line is measured item by item. The supplied brief lists the main data sources as POS stock age, store inspection, ERP inventory, and quality inspection records. Typical roles are the fresh-goods store manager, the shrinkage administrator, and the finance auditor. Updates occur daily and per shift. The daily documents are the near-expiry list, the markdown approval, the write-off form, and the promotional price tag. These materials set the input boundary for workflow routing: the near-expiry list points to a batch and its remaining shelf life, the markdown approval points to the authorization state of a price change, the write-off form points to the disposal record of unsellable goods, and the promotional price tag points to the outward label. Identifying near-expiry batches, approving markdowns, and isolating unsellable goods are the time-consuming steps, so routing must treat document state and node connection as separate concerns.
Constraints at the workflow routing step
The form input node is a user interaction node. When it triggers, the conversation enters an interaction state and the workflow state is recorded; after the user completes the interaction, the workflow continues downward. After submission, the node collects the form information the user filled in and passes it to later nodes. The user selection node also enters an interaction state; when the user makes a choice, the node judges that choice and executes the corresponding branch. Both nodes handle collection and branch determination. Business authorization, approval conclusions, inventory writes, and external synchronization require a separate business interface or a later process. Retrieval results and similarity scores do not constitute permission or entity filtering, and retrieval is not authorization to execute.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample: a store inspection record reads, "Shift of 10 March 2026, batch A-0310, remaining shelf life 2 days, status is pending markdown approval." A draft handover sentence reads, "Batch A-0310 has received markdown approval and may be sold directly at the markdown price tag." Compared with the inspection record, the draft sentence shares the same subject, batch A-0310, and the same period, the shift of 10 March 2026; the field is approval status. The inspection record states pending markdown approval, while the draft sentence states approval has been received. These are mutually exclusive values in the same field. The markdown approval form is not provided, so the approval fact remains unsupported.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration or check item | Purpose on this page | Basis and boundary |
|---|---|---|
| Form input node | Collect required information such as batch, shift, and remaining shelf life | Submitted information passes to later nodes; it does not produce an approval conclusion |
| User selection node | Obtain a choice on the markdown handling direction and follow the corresponding branch | The node judges the user choice and executes the corresponding branch; verify each branch connection |
| Interaction state check | Confirm that triggering enters the interaction state and records the workflow state | State recording is behavior of the interaction node; no separate global state switch is set |
| Output handoff check | Pass the collected information explicitly to later retrieval, judgment, or interface nodes | Compare output and input item by item; downstream business actions require a separate interface |
| Retrieval scope check | Confirm that the materials to be checked sit within a target retrieval scope with access rights | Retrieval does not perform entity or permission filtering; libraries across different vector models cannot be associated together |
| Hypothetical exercise starting value | This paper exercise uses remaining shelf life of 2 days as the near-expiry judgment starting point | The value is taken from the sample text and is compared word by word against the inspection record; it is not an official default |
Three common errors
- Treating "pending markdown approval" in the inspection record as already approved. The input is the inspection record text and the draft sentence; the compared field is approval status; the observable result is that the draft sentence states approval has been received while the source text states pending approval. The two are mutually exclusive in the same field, and the draft sentence is unsupported.
- Treating a retrieval hit or a form submission as markdown authorization. The input is the returned retrieval fragment and the submitted form value; the comparison object is whether the markdown approval form states approval; the observable result is that, when the approval form is absent, the approval fact remains missing. Retrieval and form submission do not produce authorization.
- Treating the branch direction of the user selection node as completed business execution. The input is the user selection result and the branch wiring; the comparison object is the actual record of the write-off or the price tag change; the observable result is that the branch only determines process direction, while the write-off form and the price tag change require a separate implementation record.
How to verify the setup
- Using the sample inspection record text and the draft sentence as input, compare the value of the approval status field. If the approval described in the draft sentence has no corresponding statement in the markdown approval form, judge it unsupported and preserve the evidence gap.
- Using the submitted values of the form input node as input, compare whether the fields received by later nodes match the submitted content item by item. If a field is missing or not passed, the output handoff is not satisfied.
- Using the two branches of the user selection node as input, compare whether each branch connection corresponds to the later node. If the selection result and the executed branch do not match, the branch determination is not satisfied. For an empty-result handoff, a paper input of [] can be used to check the downstream design; this does not support inferring that a retrieval of fabricated rules must return an empty set.