What the documents look like
Refund-only dispute handling differs from ordinary return-and-refund work because there is usually no returned parcel entering the warehouse. The evidence focus falls on dispatch and delivery records and on the value of the goods. The main data sources listed for this category are the platform after-sales backend, carrier tracking, customer service chat, and warehouse outbound records. The daily documents are refund-only applications, dispatch proof, delivery proof, and appeal materials. These materials update per order and per day, so workflow routing must carry the content of one interaction at a time. After-sales supervisors, platform appeal specialists, and warehouse quality inspectors each hold materials from different stages, which means the authorization boundary is drawn by role and by single request.
A refund-only application, a dispatch record, and a delivery record can disagree. The carrier track may show a parcel as delivered while the recipient field stays empty, and the warehouse outbound record may confirm that the same item left the warehouse earlier. These are separate documents from separate systems, and none of them is an authorization to pay out. The workflow routing step receives what a person submits or selects; it does not decide whether the money moves.
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 the dialog box is hidden. After the user fills the required information and submits, the node collects the submitted form values and passes them to later nodes. The user selection node is also a user-interaction node. When it triggers, the conversation enters the interaction state and the workflow state is recorded. When the user makes a choice, the node evaluates that choice and executes the corresponding "yes" branch. The basic use is to ask a question that requires a decision and then route the workflow by the user's response.
Retrieved results and collected form values are inputs to later judgment. Order writes, document backfill, and external status synchronization require a separate business interface or a later process. Retrieval and forms do not perform authorization. A relevance score is not a category, entity, or permission filter, and retrieval does not establish that a given request falls inside the current handler's operating scope.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample. The material text reads: "Refund-only application number A-204, application date 12 March 2025, goods are two vacuum flasks, the application reason states goods not received; the carrier track shows delivery on 10 March 2025 with the recipient field empty; the warehouse outbound record shows the same two units dispatched on 9 March." The drafted judgment sentence under review reads: "This application already meets the refund-only condition and can be refunded directly." The pending request reads: "Please arrange nodes to collect delivery proof and submit the platform appeal." That request is in a pending-submission state. It is not a submitted appeal and not an authorization.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Use on this page | How to check |
|---|---|---|
| Form input node, required fields: application number, application reason, delivery status | Collect the current refund-only application information | After submission, compare the output fields against the inputs of later nodes |
| User selection node, branches: supplement delivery proof, submit appeal | Execute the "yes" branch according to the user's choice | Verify each branch connection against the recorded choice |
| Interaction state check | Confirm that the node enters the interaction state and records state when triggered | Observe the dialog box being hidden and restored; no separate global switch is set |
| Output handoff check | Pass collected values to later retrieval or judgment nodes | Compare each output item against the corresponding input |
| External operation separation | Order writes and external synchronization connect through a separate interface | Confirm the interface node exists and is implemented by the business side |
| Hypothetical trial starting point: when the recipient field is empty, route first to the supplement-delivery-proof branch | This starting point is chosen because the sample recipient field is missing, and it must be compared with a case where delivery is recorded and the recipient is named | Compare branch direction under the two inputs |
Three common errors
- Treating a form submission as refund authorization. In the sample, the drafted judgment sentence states "can be refunded directly." The submission action only completes information collection. Refund execution requires a separate business interface and the corresponding authorization.
- Treating a pending review request as a submitted appeal. The sample request "please arrange nodes to collect delivery proof and submit the platform appeal" is in a pending-submission state. Completing node arrangement does not mean the appeal was submitted.
- Treating retrieval results as a permission filter. Retrieval returns content only. It does not determine whether application number A-204 falls inside the current handler's operating scope. Entity isolation requires a separate check.
How to verify the setup
- Enter the sample material text and the drafted judgment sentence. Compare branch direction under two inputs: "recipient field empty" and "recipient named." Observe whether they enter the supplement-delivery-proof branch and the later judgment branch respectively. This is an expected design outcome, not a claim that a live test was run.
- Enter the pending request. Compare the request status field. Observe whether it remains in the pending-submission state. If a submitted marker appears, that does not match the sample state.
- Enter an explicit paper empty result []. Compare whether downstream nodes accept it according to their empty-result design. Do not claim that a fictional rule retrieval necessarily returns an empty array. Libraries built on different vector models cannot be associated together; check the identifier first, exclude those that do not match, and record the actual observation.