What the documents look like
Chain-store closure settlement handles exit and asset recovery, a direction opposite to site selection and store opening. The records that matter come from POS inventory, fixed-asset systems, lease contracts and financial ledgers. They update irregularly, per store. The working documents are closure approvals, inventory clearance forms, lease termination agreements and asset count sheets. In order fulfillment and after-sales question handling, the clearance quantity, lease termination status and settlement progress must be tied to a specific store and a specific document. These materials sit with operations, finance, legal and the landlord contact, and a single store's inventory clearance form and lease termination agreement can be at different signing stages. Workflow routing has to separate which fields a form collects, which choice a user makes, and which business actions require a separate interface.
The update frequency does not change the routing behavior on this page, so it is not treated as a configuration input. What matters is that each collected field and each user choice carries a document state forward, and that state is not the same as an 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, the workflow state is recorded, and 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 triggers, the conversation enters an interaction state and the workflow state is recorded; after the user makes a choice, the node evaluates that choice and executes the "yes" branch. Interaction waiting, state recording and hiding the dialog box are existing behaviors of these two nodes. No global state switch, submission count or automatic judgment is added here.
Retrieval or form collection does not constitute authorized execution. Order writing, document backfill and external status synchronization require a separate business interface or a later process. The same-vector-model requirement applies only to that retrieval library itself and does not extend to external systems. A relevance score does not perform permission or entity isolation.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample. The closure materials for one store of a chain brand read: "Inventory clearance form number QC-001, store M-07, clearance quantity 120 items, status is pending review; lease termination agreement number ZJ-002, store M-07, signing status: unsigned; asset count sheet number PD-003, store M-07, count date 2025-03-10, two discrepancy items." The proposed handover request to judge is: "Store M-07 inventory has been fully cleared, deposit refund may be executed." Comparing that request with the source text: the clearance form status is pending review and no approval is stated; the lease termination agreement is unsigned; a deposit refund requires a separate finance interface. The request is unsupported.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Value or check on this page | Basis and boundary |
|---|---|---|
| Form input node | Collect store number, document number, clearance quantity, current status | Official document states required information is collected and passed to later nodes |
| User selection node | Set the "yes" branch to confirm whether materials are complete | Official document states the "yes" branch executes after a user choice |
| Interaction state check | After triggering, enter interaction state and record workflow state | Official document states this; no global switch is added |
| Output handoff | Pass form fields explicitly to later retrieval or judgment nodes | Official document states information is passed to later nodes |
| External action split | Deposit refund, order writing and status synchronization use a separate business interface | Official document does not describe automatic execution |
| Retrieval association check | Check the retrieval library vector model identifier and exclude mismatches | Same-vector-model requirement is limited to that library itself |
This page sets no numeric starting value. If a similarity threshold is later needed, it should be stated separately as a hypothetical trial starting value with its reason for selection and the value it is compared against, and not described as an official default.
Three common errors
- Treating a collected "pending review" status as review approval and triggering a deposit refund. Input is the QC-001 status field; comparison object is the approval condition; observable result is the downstream interface being called. The correct handling keeps pending review as incomplete.
- Reading the "yes" branch of the user selection node as business authorization. Input is the user choice action; comparison object is the authorization boundary; observable result is the branch being executed. A choice action only decides the flow direction and does not replace legal or finance approval.
- Treating a retrieval relevance score as a means of entity isolation. Input is the query and the score; comparison object is the store-number filter condition; observable result is whether records from unrelated stores appear in the output. Relevance does not exclude unauthorized records.
How to verify the setup
- Using the hypothetical source text above, input QC-001 status "pending review" and the proposed request "deposit refund may be executed"; compare the conditions the request requires against the status stated in the source; observe whether the downstream action is blocked. If the downstream refund action is not executed, the condition is met; if it is executed, the configuration has a gap.
- Input ZJ-002 signing status "unsigned"; compare a draft sentence of the "contract is effective" type against the source; observe whether the system outputs "effective." If the output is unsupported or marked for verification, the condition is met; if it outputs effective, correction is needed.
- Use a paper input of empty result [] to check the downstream design; compare whether the downstream handles it as no record; observe whether a fabricated record appears. If the downstream carries the empty result forward, the condition is met; if it generates a record, correction is needed. The empty result does not claim that a retrieval rule always returns [].
This page addresses only chain-store closure settlement, order fulfillment and after-sales question handling, and workflow routing. At the operations handover, which materials, actions and requests are in which authorization state cannot be replaced by retrieval or a form.