What the documents look like
Brand outlet discount operations exist to clear out-of-season inventory, and they do not maintain a new-arrival full-price image. The working materials are discount approvals, slow-moving inventory lists, price tags, and gross-margin calculation sheets. These documents draw on ERP inventory age, POS sales, outlet mall campaign information, and historical discount records. For copy drafting, this material set defines which statements can be written. An inventory-age stage, a sales status, a discount approval status, and a gross-margin result each support different sentences and leave other sentences unsupported.
The update rhythm of the underlying data is weekly and monthly. That rhythm does not change the routing behavior described here, so it is noted only as background. The routing task is narrower: carry the checked results of these materials through nodes in order, so that the drafting input and the downstream handoff have a traceable source. A discount approval that is submitted but not yet reviewed, and an approval that has been granted with a stated discount and validity period, are different states and cannot be written as one.
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, the workflow state is recorded, and execution continues after the user completes the interaction. The node collects the required information the user submits and passes that information to later nodes. The User Selection node is also a user-interaction node with the same interaction-state behavior. When the user makes a choice, the node evaluates that choice and executes the corresponding "yes" branch. Branch connections need to be verified one by one.
The interaction state and the hidden dialog box are documented behaviors of these interaction nodes. No separate global state-recording switch is documented, and none should be asserted. Collected information must be explicitly passed to a later retrieval, judgment, or interface node, and the output compared field by field against the input. Order writing, document backfill, and external status synchronization require a separate business interface or a later flow; the nodes themselves do not perform those business actions. A pending review is not an approval, an offered option is not an execution, and an unsigned termination is not a completed termination.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample. The source material reads: "Style A-101, inventory age week 14, POS sales zero over the last four weeks, discount approval form status submitted and pending review, unsigned." "Style A-102, inventory age week 9, discount approval form status approved, approved discount sixty percent, valid until the end of the current quarter." The proposed draft sentence is: "A-101 has received discount approval and can be cleared at sixty percent." This sentence does not match the source. The A-101 approval status is pending review and unsigned; the sixty-percent approval belongs to A-102. Pending review does not constitute approval, and unsigned does not constitute a completed signature.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Use on this page | Check method |
|---|---|---|
| Form Input node | Collect style number, inventory-age stage, and approval status as drafting input | After submission, compare output against input item by item |
| User Selection node | Branch on whether to cite a discount approval conclusion | Verify the "yes" branch connection one by one |
| Interaction state | Enter the interaction state and record workflow state when triggered | Follow the documented behavior; no additional switch |
| Output handoff | Pass collected information to a later retrieval or judgment node | Check that input fields match the downstream receiving fields |
| External action split | Approval signing and inventory backfill are implemented by a separate business interface | Check whether they are declared as downstream implementation |
| Hypothetical starting point for this exercise | Draft citation threshold set as "approval status approved and signed" | Compare field by field against the source material; this is a hypothetical starting point only |
The starting value above is chosen for this exercise because the sample material distinguishes an approved-and-signed record from a pending-and-unsigned one. It is compared against the approval status field of each source record. It is not an official default and carries no documented numeric limit.
Three common errors
- Writing a pending-review status as an approved status. The input is the hypothetical sample's A-101 record, "submitted and pending review, unsigned." The comparison object is the draft sentence "has received discount approval." The observable result is that the status fields do not match, and the draft sentence is unsupported.
- Applying A-102's sixty-percent approval terms to A-101. The input is the two source sentences. Comparing style number and approval fields shows that the approved discount and validity period belong only to A-102, and A-101 has no corresponding approval record.
- Adding authorization or effective-date language where the source does not support it. The input is source material that does not state signing or effective-date information. Comparing whether the draft sentence contains such wording shows that the field is absent from the source, and the wording remains unverified.
How to verify the setup
- Enter both hypothetical source sentences and the proposed draft sentence into the checking flow together. Compare style number, approval status, discount value, and validity period across the four fields. The expected observation is that the draft sentence disagrees with the source on the approval status field, and it is judged unsupported.
- Ask separately about A-102: "Which style number does the sixty-percent approval apply to?" Compare the style number in the answer against the source. The expected observation is that the answer points to A-102 and does not extend to A-101. If the answer names A-101, record it as a failed branch.
- Use the paper input
[]to check empty-result handling, and observe whether the downstream node treats it as no retrieval result. Do not claim that a fictional rule retrieval necessarily returns empty. At the same time, check the retrieval library identifier and the vector model identifier, and exclude combinations that do not share the same model. Record what is actually observed rather than presuming a missed-recall outcome. A relevance score does not filter by category, entity, or permission, and retrieval is not authorization.