What the documents look like
Brand-owned stores are staffed and accounted for directly by the brand, and they are not managed through franchise contracts. That difference shapes which materials a copy-drafting check can draw on: the evidence comes from inside the brand rather than from a franchisee. The recurring documents for this category include daily sales reports, shift schedules, display photographs and stock transfer orders, refreshed daily or weekly. This page addresses one task only, the drafting of product and marketing copy. The materials involved are the source text to be checked and the proposed sentences, while the forms-and-interaction step collects the information the draft needs and passes it to later nodes.
Constraints at the interactive forms 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 execution continues after the user completes the interaction. The node collects the values the user fills in and passes them to later nodes. It does not include a business database function of its own. Field validation, business approval, write-back and bulk operations are implemented as needed in external systems or in later nodes. The User Selection node executes a branch according to the user's choice; it does not act as a personnel directory or a business data selector. Retrieval and similarity do not carry permission or entity isolation.
Hypothetical paper test case. Source text for checking: "This store's member repurchase rate was 18% for the period 1 March 2024 to 31 March 2024" and "Same-store sales for the same period rose 5% month on month." Proposed sentence: "This store's member repurchase rate is at a leading level in the industry." The proposed sentence goes beyond the source text: the source gives only this store's figure and the month-on-month change, and it records no industry comparison data. The proposed sentence is unsupported.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Type | Hypothetical starting point and reason for this page |
|---|---|---|
| Form Input node | Documented node | On trigger it enters the interaction state and records the workflow state |
| User Selection node | Documented node | Executes a branch according to the user's choice |
| Required-information list | Implementation check | Lists proposed sentence, source text, date range and store entity |
| Missing-field behaviour check | Implementation check | Tests a missing field and a completed field separately for the passed result |
| Downstream division of work | Implementation check | Field validation, approval and write-back are implemented in external systems or later nodes |
| Retrieval result check | Implementation check | Observes returned items and the failure branch; the first item is not assured to match |
The hypothetical starting point is that all required fields are filled. That starting point is chosen because the source text and the proposed sentence must both be complete before they can be compared. The comparison method is to remove one required field at a time and observe whether the interaction state continues.
Three common errors
- Treating an industry comparison in a proposed sentence as a verified fact. Input: the sample proposed sentence. Comparison: whether the source text records industry data. Observable result: the source text does not record that field, so the sentence is unsupported.
- Treating retrieval similarity as a permission filter. Input: one retrieval request. Comparison: whether the returned items fall within the authorised scope. Observable result: similarity does not exclude unrelated business records, and permission must be checked separately.
- Treating the User Selection node as a business data selector. Input: one selection action. Comparison: whether the node executes a branch. Observable result: the node only executes a branch according to the choice and does not provide a personnel directory.
How to verify the setup
- Use the sample source text and proposed sentence. Input: "This store's member repurchase rate was 18% for the period 1 March 2024 to 31 March 2024" together with "This store's member repurchase rate is at a leading level in the industry." Comparison: whether the source text records industry data. Observable result: the source text does not record it, so the proposed sentence is unsupported.
- Use the sample source text and the month-on-month sentence. Input: "Same-store sales for the same period rose 5% month on month." Comparison: whether the proposed sentence goes beyond that field's scope. Observable result: the sentence supports only a month-on-month statement and does not support an industry comparison.
- Use an empty-result handoff. Input: a paper input of []. Comparison: whether the downstream design handles an empty result. Observable result: the downstream handles the empty-result branch, and no claim is made that a fictional rule retrieval would return [].
The documented public technical facts used to identify relevant content are: Form Input collects the values filled in and passes them to later nodes, without a business database function of its own; the required-information check lists the information this task cannot omit and tests missing and completed fields separately; User Selection executes a branch according to the user's choice and is not written as a personnel directory or business data selector; the interaction state records the workflow state and waits, then continues after the interaction completes; field validation, business approval, write-back and bulk operations are implemented as needed in external systems or later nodes.