What the documents look like
Convenience-store fresh food is ordered by the store at high frequency against short shelf life. It is not handled as a leased-counter revenue-share arrangement, which is a common pattern for large-format supermarket fresh counters. The data sources named in the brief are POS sales, the headquarters ordering system, store inventory, and cold-chain temperature records. The documents handled day to day are the fresh-food order form, the loss report, the near-expiry handling sheet, and the temperature record. Update frequency is daily and per shift.
For order fulfillment and after-sales question handling, the workflow step has to collect what the store submits about an order, a loss report, or a near-expiry item through interaction nodes, then pass that collected content to later nodes. Short shelf life makes the shared basis fragile: if the date, quantity, or store entity on an order form and a loss report do not line up, later comparison loses its common reference. The documents also carry different states. An order form records what was ordered. A loss report records a reported loss and a reason. A temperature record records a reading. None of these by itself records delivery completion, settlement, or approval.
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 fills 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. It enters the interaction state in the same way, and when the user makes a choice, the node evaluates that choice and executes the "yes" branch. The recorded interaction state is existing node behavior. This page does not add a global state switch, does not assert a submission count, and does not claim automatic judgment or snapshot guarantees.
Collected information must be explicitly passed to later retrieval, judgment, or interface nodes, and output must be compared item by item against input. Order writing, document backfill, and external status synchronization require a separate business interface or a later process. Retrieval and form collection do not constitute authorized execution. A relevance score is not a category, entity, or permission filter, and retrieval is not authorization. A pending request is not approval, an offered option is not execution, and an unsigned termination is not a completed termination.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample: the source material reads, "Store A submitted a fresh-food order form on the April 10 shift, with a rice-ball order quantity of 120 and a delivery date of April 11; on the same day it submitted a loss report for 8 rice balls with the reason near-expiry; the temperature record shows the refrigerated case reading 5 degrees Celsius at 6:00 that day." The draft sentence to be judged is, "Store A's order of 120 rice balls was delivered on April 11 and the loss report was settled." The source material contains only the order quantity, the loss quantity, and the temperature reading. It does not state delivery completion or loss settlement, so the draft sentence is not supported.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Use on this page | Basis or checking method |
|---|---|---|
| Form input node | Collect required order-form information | After submission it passes information to later nodes; compare input and output item by item |
| User selection node | Pose a choice about loss or near-expiry handling | After the user chooses, the "yes" branch executes; verify each branch connection |
| Interaction state check | Confirm entry into the interaction state after triggering | Recorded state is node behavior; do not assert a global switch |
| Output handoff check | Pass collected information to a retrieval or judgment node | Compare whether output and input fields match |
| External action separation | Order writing and status synchronization | Requires a separate business interface or later process |
Hypothetical trial starting value: set the rice-ball order quantity field to 120, chosen because the sample source states that quantity. The comparison objects are the loss-report quantity of 8 and the temperature reading of 5 degrees Celsius. This is a paper checking starting point only, not an official default.
Three common errors
- Treating form collection as authorized execution. In the sample, submitting the order form does not equal delivery completion. The error is writing a collection action as a business result. The check takes the sample source and the draft sentence as input, compares whether a "delivery completed" expression appears, and records a failure when it does.
- Treating a user-selection branch as already executed. The sample contains no loss-settlement choice. The error is writing a pending request as handled. The check compares whether the source contains a settlement field; when it is absent, the gap is recorded.
- Treating retrieval association as a permission filter. The retrieval scope in the sample contains Store A material. The error is using similarity to exclude other stores' records. The check verifies the entity identifier, excludes non-matching records, and records the actual observation.
How to verify the setup
- Verification one: input the sample source and the draft sentence "Store A's order of 120 rice balls was delivered on April 11 and the loss report was settled." Compare whether the source states delivery completion and loss settlement. The source does not state them, so the judgment is not supported. The condition is met when the evidence gap is preserved.
- Verification two: input the sample source and the request "Please confirm that Store A's loss of 8 rice balls has been settled." Compare whether the loss report contains a settlement status. The source states only the loss quantity and reason, so the judgment is pending verification. The condition is met when no authorization clause is fabricated.
- Verification three: input the paper empty result [] and the downstream design. Compare whether the downstream design treats an empty result as no records. The design must state empty-result handling. The condition is met when no claim is made that retrieval necessarily returns empty.
All three verifications are paper comparisons and were not actually executed. Where the source does not state a system error code or an automatic business action, no such error code or action is asserted. Where a document field is not provided, it remains unknown.