What the documents look like
Supermarket supplier onboarding and settlement centres on purchase-and-sale or consignment payables. A supplier does not necessarily operate a staffed counter inside the store, which separates this category from a large-format joint-venture counter arrangement. Working data arrives from ERP purchasing, supplier portals, POS sales and finance systems. The routine document set includes purchase contracts, delivery acceptance notes, rebate agreements and statements of account. Update cadence is weekly or monthly. Reconciliation of accepted quantities, calculation of rebate deductions and handling of return discrepancies consume the most working time. Contract clauses and transaction materials must correspond item by item on counterparty, period and field. Workflow routing carries the task of separating interaction collection, retrieval-based comparison and downstream business interfaces.
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 execution resumes after the user completes the interaction. It collects the required information the user submits and passes that information to later nodes. The User Selection node is also a user-interaction node: on trigger the conversation enters the interaction state and the workflow state is recorded; when the user makes a choice, the node evaluates that choice and executes the "yes" branch. The interaction-state record is behaviour of the interaction nodes. No separate global state-recording switch is documented. Collected values must be explicitly passed to later retrieval, decision or interface nodes. Order writes, document backfill and external status synchronization require a separate business interface or a later process. Retrieval does not perform authorization judgement; semantic recall and relevance scores do not isolate permissions or entities.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample. A supplier and a supermarket sign a purchase contract. The contract text reads: "Party A is a certain supermarket; Party B is a certain food supplier; the settlement cycle is the natural month; the rebate is calculated at three percent of the tax-inclusive purchase amount; the contract is valid from 1 January 2025 to 31 December 2025." The delivery acceptance note reads: "Receipt date 12 March 2025; accepted quantity one thousand cases; acceptance signatures complete." The statement of account reads: "Settlement period March 2025; tax-inclusive purchase amount one hundred thousand yuan; rebate three thousand yuan." The draft sentence to be assessed is: "This supplier's March rebate has been settled in accordance with the contract." That draft sentence turns on whether counterparty, period and field agree, and must be compared item by item against the materials above.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Use on this page | Implementation check |
|---|---|---|
| Form Input node | Collect contract number, settlement period, supplier name | After required fields are submitted, confirm the values passed to later nodes |
| User Selection node | Put a yes-or-no question about the draft sentence | Confirm the yes branch connects to the next comparison step |
| Retrieval input | Enter contract and statement text | Observe returned results; first-item hit is not guaranteed |
| Empty-result handling | Check downstream design against a paper input of [] | Confirm the downstream node's path for empty input |
| External action split | Settlement write and status synchronization | Confirm a separate business interface; the node itself does not write |
| Interaction-state check | State recording is interaction-node behaviour | No separate global state-recording switch is documented |
Hypothetical trial starting point: set the retrieval relevance threshold to 0.5 for this exercise. The reason is to make the correspondence between returned results and input text easier to observe. The comparison object is the set of returned entries for the same input at different thresholds. This value is a hypothetical starting point for this exercise and is not an official default.
Three common errors
- Treating a retrieval result as an authorization basis. Retrieval returning contract text does not show that the supplier has settlement authorization; authorization status needs separate supporting material.
- Treating a pending-review status as missing operating permission. Pending review shows only that the process is unfinished; it does not demonstrate that permission is absent.
- Accepting "settlement completed" in the draft sentence at face value. Signing, reaching cooperation and contract effectiveness are three distinct facts; completed settlement needs corresponding evidence.
How to verify the setup
- Enter the contract text and the statement text given above. Compare the counterparty, period and field in the draft sentence "This supplier's March rebate has been settled in accordance with the contract." Observe whether the contract counterparty and the statement counterparty agree, whether the settlement period is March 2025, and whether the rebate amount matches the contract ratio. When all three agree, the draft sentence has material support; when any item is not stated, record it as pending verification.
- Enter a paper empty result of []. Compare whether the downstream node handles empty input as designed, and observe whether an undefined branch appears. The condition is met when the downstream follows the designed path.
- Enter the no branch of the User Selection node. Compare whether the workflow executes the corresponding branch, and observe whether it proceeds to the next comparison step. The condition is met when the branch connection is correct. All of the above are paper expectations and were not actually executed.