What the documents look like
General trade import declaration work for each shipment involves the import declaration form, commercial invoice, packing list, bill of lading and contract. Data sources named in the brief include the International Trade Single Window, customs tariff schedules, freight forwarder arrival notices and foreign exchange payment documents. Compared with export declaration, the import stage concentrates on dutiable value, freight and insurance charges, and tax payment. These materials update per shipment. For copy drafting, the information needed is spread across several documents, so the drafting step depends on confirming the transaction method from the contract and invoice, and on checking the goods description and quantity from the bill of lading and packing list.
Constraints at the workflow routing step
Copy drafting for this category needs to collect material information first, then judge whether a proposed sentence is supported by those materials. The form input node is a user interaction node: when triggered, the conversation enters an interaction state, the workflow state is recorded, and execution continues after the user completes the interaction. Required fields are collected and passed to later nodes after submission. The user selection node is also a user interaction node; when the user makes a choice, the node evaluates that choice and executes the corresponding branch. Both nodes record workflow state and wait for user interaction before continuing.
Information collected this way must be explicitly passed to downstream retrieval, judgment or interface nodes, and outputs must be compared item by item against inputs. Order writing, document backfill and external status synchronization require a separate business interface or a later process; the documented nodes do not perform those actions.
A retrieval library and its query must use the same vector model. Libraries using different vector models cannot be associated together. Semantic recall and relevance scores do not carry permission or entity isolation functions, so a high similarity result is not evidence that the record is authorized for this shipment.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Purpose on this page | Value and notes |
|---|---|---|
| Form input node | Collect the proposed copy sentence and the corresponding material fields | Set as required; pass to later nodes after submission |
| User selection node | Let the reviewer choose supported, pending verification or contradictory | Execute the corresponding branch after the choice |
| Retrieval library and query vector model | Associate product copy materials | Must be the same vector model; different models are not associated together |
| Empty-result handling | Check the downstream design when retrieval returns an empty list | Compare against a paper input of []; do not claim a fabricated rule always returns [] |
| Output handoff | Pass collected information to retrieval, judgment or interface nodes | Compare outputs against inputs item by item |
| External operation split | Order writing, document backfill and external status synchronization | Requires a separate business interface or later process |
Hypothetical trial starting point for this page: set the retrieval return count to 5. The reason is that this value makes it convenient to compare the material text and the proposed sentence one by one. Compare it against the actual number of results returned by the retrieval library and observe whether the needed material fields are covered. This value is only a hypothetical trial starting point for this page and is not an official default.
Three common errors
- Treating semantic recall or a relevance score as a permission or entity filter. In a hypothetical drill sample, retrieval returns materials for other batches of the same product; the relevance is high, but those records fall outside the authorized scope of this shipment. Check method: input the material identifier for this shipment, compare the subject and batch of the returned results, and observe whether records from other batches are mixed in.
- Treating the interaction node's state record as a global state switch. The form input node and user selection node enter an interaction state and record workflow state when triggered; the documentation does not describe a global state recording switch. Check method: inspect the conversation state after the node is triggered and compare whether any control item not stated in the documentation is present.
- Merging retrieval results across different vector models for direct comparison. Libraries using different vector models cannot be associated together, so no conclusion about missed recall or redundancy can be drawn from such a comparison. Check method: inspect the vector model identifiers of the retrieval library and the query, exclude those that do not match, and record the actual observation.
How to verify the setup
Hypothetical drill sample: the material text reads "Contract No. HYP-2024-001, transaction method CIF, goods are industrial stainless steel pipes, quantity 500 pieces, bill of lading date 10 March 2024." The proposed sentence to be judged reads "This batch of industrial stainless steel pipes was shipped on 10 March 2024, quantity 500 pieces." This sample is used only for paper-based checking and does not involve a real customer or a legitimate identity number.
- Check the same field in the proposed sentence and the material text. Input the shipment date and quantity from the proposed sentence, compare them against the bill of lading date and the packing list quantity in the material text, and observe whether the two agree. When they agree, the field is supported; when they disagree, record a contradiction; when the material does not state the field, record it as pending verification.
- Check whether the retrieval results cover the required material fields. Input the product name, transaction method and quantity involved in the proposed sentence, compare the corresponding fields in the returned results, and observe whether they are covered. When an empty list is returned, compare the downstream design against a paper input of [] and record the gap.
- Check whether the information collected by the interaction node is passed to the later judgment node. Input the proposed sentence and material fields submitted through the form, compare them against the input received by the later node, and observe whether they correspond item by item. When information is not passed or is passed incompletely, record it as requiring repair.