What the documents look like
Fresh-food weighing and sorting happens inside warehouse fulfillment, and its central facts are weight and specification. The main data sources are the WMS, electronic scales, the order system and quality-inspection photos. The daily documents are sorting task sheets, weighing labels, short-weight compensation forms and quality-inspection records. These materials update per order and per day.
Weight deviation connects directly to short-shipment payouts, gross-margin loss and poor customer reviews. A sorting task sheet records the object to be sorted; a weighing label carries the actual weight; a short-weight compensation form and a quality-inspection record enter the after-sales question stage. Workflow routing has to collect, pass and judge these documents at the correct nodes. A retrieval result or a submitted form is not a business authorization.
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 flow waits for the user to complete the interaction before continuing. The node collects required information and, after submission, passes that information to later nodes. The User Selection node behaves the same way at the interaction level: it records state and waits, then judges the user's choice and executes the corresponding "yes" branch.
The constraint is that the interaction state only shows the flow is waiting for input. It does not authorize a short-weight compensation, a refund or an order write. Collected weight, specification and after-sales reason must be explicitly passed to later retrieval, judgment or interface nodes, and output must be compared against input item by item. Order writes, document backfill and external status synchronization require a separate business interface or a later process; the workflow itself does not perform those business actions. A similarity score from a retrieval library does not perform permission or entity isolation, so semantic recall cannot be treated as an authorization filter.
Configuration and implementation checks
The table lists implementation check items for this page's documents and primary task. The values are hypothetical starting points for this paper exercise, used to explain the comparison method. They are not official defaults.
| Configuration item | Hypothetical starting point for this exercise | Check method and reason |
|---|---|---|
| Form Input required fields | Sorting task sheet number, weighing-label weight, after-sales reason | After submission, compare each value received by later nodes to confirm complete field passing |
| User Selection branch | The "yes" branch connects to the compensation review node | Verify branch connections one by one to confirm the choice enters the intended path |
| Interaction-state wait | Record state and wait for submission | Check against the documented explanation; do not add a global state switch |
| Output handoff | Pass collected information to retrieval or judgment nodes | Compare input and output to confirm no field is lost |
| External action split | Order writes and status synchronization connect to a separate interface | Confirm the workflow does not carry business writes, so routing is not treated as execution |
| Retrieval input | Paper input [] for empty-result handling | Check how the downstream design handles an empty result; do not claim a fictional rule always returns [] |
Three common errors
- Treating form submission as compensation authorization. The Form Input node collects required information and passes it to later nodes. Submission only means the user completed the interaction. Whether a short-weight compensation form takes effect requires business review and cannot be derived from form submission.
- Treating the "yes" branch of User Selection as already executed. The node judges the choice and executes the corresponding branch. A branch connection only shows flow direction; compensation issuance or order modification still requires a separate business interface.
- Treating retrieval similarity as a permission filter. A similarity score from a retrieval library does not perform entity isolation or permission judgment. Libraries using different vector models cannot be associated together; identifiers must be checked first and non-matching items excluded.
How to verify the setup
Hypothetical paper exercise sample: a sorting task sheet reads "Task sheet number SF-2024-001, object is 500-gram-specification leafy greens, sorter has completed weighing, weighing label records 480 grams, quality-inspection record notes slight compression damage." A draft sentence to be judged reads "Based on the above weighing label and quality-inspection record, this short-weight compensation form has taken effect and a refund can be executed." The input is that source text and that draft sentence. Compare subject, object and status: the source text records only weighing and inspection results. It does not state compensation-form review or refund execution. The draft sentence treats a record as an effective authorization, which is unsupported.
- Verification one: input the source text above and the draft sentence, and compare whether "compensation form has taken effect" has a corresponding review record. The source text does not state a review status, so the draft sentence's effectiveness conclusion is unsupported and the evidence gap must be recorded.
- Verification two: input one hypothetical selection record from the User Selection node, and compare whether the "yes" branch connection matches the compensation review node. If the branch connection is correct, the flow enters the review node. If the connection is missing, record it as pending verification and do not infer that compensation was executed.
- Verification three: input the paper retrieval result
[]and the downstream handling design, and compare whether the downstream design handles an empty result as designed. Empty-result handling can be used to check the downstream design. Do not claim that a fictional rule's retrieval always returns[].