What the documents look like
Brand after-sales repair service centres on warranty responsibility and physical repair outlets, which separates it from platform after-sales handling that mainly processes refunds. The everyday documents in this category are warranty cards, repair work orders, inspection reports and replacement approvals. The main data sources are the after-sales system, store orders, repair outlet feedback and the national three-guarantee catalogue. Typical operating parties are the brand after-sales centre, store service staff and repair outlets.
These materials determine which fields and states the workflow has to carry during order fulfilment and after-sales question handling. A repair work order may record a send-in date, a faulty component and an outlet, while a warranty card states a coverage period and an inspection report states a conclusion. A replacement approval carries its own approval status. The workflow routing step has to move these values between nodes without treating any one document as covering a fact that belongs to another.
Data updates per order and per day. Where the update frequency does not affect this page's function, it is not discussed further.
Constraints at the workflow routing step
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 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 it is triggered, the conversation enters an interaction state and the workflow state is recorded; when the user makes a selection, the node evaluates the selection and executes the corresponding "yes" branch. Recording the state is behaviour of the interaction node itself. The documents do not describe a separate global state-recording switch, so none is assumed here.
Information collected by a form node needs an explicit downstream destination, whether that is a retrieval node, an evaluation node or an interface node. Order writing, document backfill and external state synchronisation require a separate business interface or a later process. A form collects values; it does not perform business verification, approval, database writes or external synchronisation. Retrieval is used to find material. Retrieval does not constitute authorisation and does not perform entity isolation, so a similarity score is not a category, entity or permission filter.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample. A brand after-sales centre receives a repair work order stating: "Send-in date 10 March 2025; faulty component is the power module." The matching warranty card states: "Whole-unit warranty valid until 30 June 2025." The matching inspection report states: "Conclusion: non-human damage." A replacement approval document states: "Application for replacement; approval status is pending review." A draft sentence reads: "This order has been approved for replacement; please instruct the outlet to ship." For judging that draft sentence, the inputs are the work order, warranty card, inspection report and replacement approval as written above. The comparison is between "has been approved for replacement" in the draft sentence and "pending review" in the approval document, checking whether the two refer to the same subject, the same period and the same field with mutually exclusive values. Pending review does not constitute approval, 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 send-in date, faulty component and warranty card information | Documented: after triggering, the conversation enters an interaction state; after submission the information is passed on |
| User selection node | Let the user confirm whether to apply for replacement or continue repair | Documented: after the user makes a selection, the "yes" branch is executed |
| Interaction state check | Confirm waiting and recording behaviour | Documented: the interaction node records the workflow state |
| Output handover check | Pass collected information to later retrieval or evaluation nodes | Compare output against input item by item |
| External action split | Order writing, document backfill, state synchronisation | Requires a separate business interface or later process |
| Retrieval scope check | Confirm that the material being checked is within accessible scope | Where missing, record the gap; do not presume authorisation |
Three common errors
- Treating "pending review" on a replacement approval as approved. Input is the approval document text. Compare the draft sentence "has been approved for replacement" with "pending review", and observe whether both refer to the same subject, the same period and the same field with mutually exclusive values. Pending review is an incomplete state and does not yield approval.
- Treating information collected by a form input node as if order writing or external synchronisation were already complete. Input is the submitted form information. Compare whether a later node explicitly takes it over, and observe whether a separate business interface or later process exists. A form only collects values; business writing needs downstream implementation.
- Treating a retrieval result as a basis for authorisation. Input is the material returned by retrieval. Compare the retrieval scope with the target record, and observe whether the same vector model applies and whether the material is within accessible scope. Retrieval does not handle permissions or entity isolation; where the material is missing, record the gap.
How to verify the setup
- Using the work order, warranty card, inspection report and replacement approval as written in the hypothetical sample, input the draft sentence "This order has been approved for replacement; please instruct the outlet to ship." Compare "has been approved for replacement" with "pending review" in the approval document, and observe whether the same subject, the same period and the same field with mutually exclusive values apply. Where those conditions hold, the draft sentence is not supported and should remain pending verification.
- Using the form submission information from the hypothetical sample, input the send-in date, faulty component and warranty card information. Compare whether a later node explicitly takes them over, and observe whether output and input correspond item by item. Where they correspond, the information is passed to later nodes; order writing and external synchronisation remain unknown.
- Using the paper input [] to check the downstream handover design, observe whether the downstream handles an empty result as designed. Where it does, the downstream produces no fabricated record. Retrieval does not guarantee a first-item hit or full recall; the actual observation has to be recorded.
These checks describe expected behaviour. They are not a claim that any test, deployment, approval, refund or other business action has taken place.