What the documents look like
General trade import declaration work centres on dutiable value, freight and insurance, and tax payment. The main data sources are the International Trade Single Window, the customs tariff, the freight forwarder's arrival notice, and foreign exchange payment documents. The documents handled per entry are the import declaration form, commercial invoice, packing list, bill of lading, and contract. Data updates once per entry. The primary task of contract-to-transaction-material comparison is to place the transaction method, price terms, parties, and goods information stated in the contract text against the invoice, packing list, bill of lading, and other transaction materials, item by item. Customs brokers and customs managers confirm the transaction method and fill in freight and insurance for each entry. Any field that diverges from the contract can lead to supplementary tax with a late declaration or to cargo sitting at port.
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 subsequent 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; when the user makes a selection, the node evaluates that selection and executes the corresponding branch. Workflow routing can only carry these interaction results forward. A form submission is not a business authorization or a completed approval.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample: an importer signs a contract with an overseas supplier. The contract text states "transaction method CIF Shanghai, invoice amount USD 50,000, shipment period March 2025." A proposed sentence reads "Payment for the goods under this contract has been settled, and customs release may proceed." The contract text does not state payment status, so the payment fact in the proposed sentence is unsupported. A handover request reads "Please release against the contract." The contract does not state release authorization, so the request exceeds the scope of the contract text.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Type | Hypothetical starting point for this exercise and reason |
|---|---|---|
| Required fields on the Form Input node | Node behaviour | Set to contract number, transaction method, and invoice amount, matching the three items stated in the sample contract text |
| Branches on the User Selection node | Node behaviour | Set "consistent" and "pending verification" branches, matching the judgment result for the sample proposed sentence |
| Output receiving node | Implementation check | Check whether the form output is passed item by item into the subsequent comparison node |
| Interaction state record | Node behaviour | Check whether the interaction state is entered and recorded after the trigger |
| External write interface | Requires a separate system implementation | Order writing and document backfill require a separate business interface |
| Retrieval scope identifier | Implementation check | Check whether the vector model identifier of the retrieval library matches the query |
Three common errors
- Treating submission on the Form Input node as business authorization. In the sample, the user's form submission only completes information collection; the contract does not state release authorization, and submission is not authorization.
- Treating the "consistent" branch of the User Selection node as a comparison conclusion. The payment fact in the sample proposed sentence is unsupported; the selection branch only records the user's judgment and does not change the evidence status.
- Treating retrieval results as permission filtering. A relevance score does not carry entity or permission isolation, and a retrieval hit does not mean the record is authorized for use.
How to verify the setup
- Input the sample contract text and the proposed sentence, and compare "payment has been settled" in the proposed sentence with the content stated in the contract text. When the contract does not state payment status, the output should be "pending verification," and no "settled" judgment should appear.
- Input the sample handover request "Please release against the contract," and compare the request content with the scope stated in the contract. When the contract does not state release authorization, the output should record the authorization gap and should not execute a release action.
- Input the required form fields contract number, transaction method, and invoice amount, and compare the form output with the input of the subsequent node. When all three items are passed item by item, the receiving condition is met; when any is missing, record the gap.