What the documents look like
For day-to-day Tmall flagship store operations, contract and transaction material comparison draws on four document types: product listing pages, brand authorization letters, delivery commitment records, and after-sales tickets. Compared with JD POP stores, Tmall flagship stores place more weight on brand authorization and flagship store identity, so these materials must be checked for consistency of subject, object, and valid scope when compared. The supplied brief states a data update frequency of daily and per order; this page references that frequency only when checking timeliness-related fields and does not derive batch synchronization or real-time triggers from it. Typical operating parties are brand e-commerce departments, Tmall store managers, and agency operators. Error consequences include product delisting, delayed-shipment compensation, and store rating decline, so comparison conclusions must retain evidence gaps and must not treat retrieval results as authorization determinations.
Constraints at the workflow routing step
Workflow routing in this task handles material collection, branch decisions, and downstream handoff. When the form input node triggers, the conversation enters an interaction state, collects required information, and passes it to subsequent nodes. When the user makes a selection, the user selection node evaluates that selection and executes the "yes" branch. The interaction state is recorded by the node itself; no separate global state-recording switch is documented. Collected material information must be explicitly passed to subsequent retrieval, judgment, or interface nodes. Order writes, document backfill, and external status synchronization require a separate business interface or subsequent flow. Retrieval and relevance scores do not carry permission or entity isolation. Libraries across different vector models cannot be associated together; only identifiers can be checked and non-matching items excluded. Optional paths shown in a document's overall flow diagram do not mean every request executes all of them. Image retrieval requires a corresponding image input and model capability. Reranking requires a model and must be enabled according to settings.
Hypothetical drill sample: A Tmall flagship store operator submits the original text of a brand authorization letter reading: "Authorizing party A, authorized party B, authorized brand C, authorization period from January 1, 2025 to December 31, 2025, authorization scope limited to Tmall platform flagship store product publishing." The operator also submits a draft sentence: "B may continue to use brand C to publish products in March 2026." The question is whether this draft sentence is supported by the original authorization letter. A separate handoff request reads: "Please synchronize B's authorization status to the ERP order table." This request involves an external system write and requires a separate business interface; it does not execute automatically because a form was collected.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Type | Implementation check note |
|---|---|---|
| Form input node | Interaction node | Triggers into interaction state, collects required information, passes it to subsequent nodes |
| User selection node | Interaction node | Executes the "yes" branch after the user makes a selection; verify branch connections one by one |
| Output handoff check | Manual check | Explicitly pass collected information to subsequent retrieval, judgment, or interface nodes; compare output against input item by item |
| External operation separation | Implementation check | Order writes, document backfill, and external status synchronization require a separate business interface or subsequent flow |
| Retrieval scope check | Manual check | Verify library identifiers and vector model identifiers; exclude cross-model association |
| Hypothetical trial starting point | This hypothesis | Use the authorization end date December 31, 2025 as the comparison baseline against March 2026 in the draft sentence to judge whether the authorization scope is exceeded |
Three common errors
- Treating retrieval results as an authorization determination. Retrieval returns relevant materials only and does not carry permission or entity isolation. Incorrect behavior: treating a retrieved authorization letter as proof that the draft sentence is supported, while ignoring the authorization period and scope.
- Treating form collection as equivalent to external execution. The form input node collects information and passes it to subsequent nodes; order writes and external status synchronization require a separate business interface. Incorrect behavior: assuming that submitting the form completes ERP synchronization.
- Extending the interaction state record into a global switch. The interaction state is recorded by the node itself; no separate global state-recording switch is documented. Incorrect behavior: searching configuration for a global state control that does not exist.
How to verify the setup
- For the draft sentence in the hypothetical sample, input the original authorization letter text and the draft sentence, then compare the authorization period field: the original states December 31, 2025, and the draft sentence states March 2026. These are mutually exclusive values in the same field, so the draft sentence is judged unsupported by the original text. Expected observation: the comparison conclusion clearly notes that the authorization period is exceeded.
- For the handoff request, input the request text and the form node output, then compare the requested action against the node capability: the form node only collects and passes information, and order writes require a separate interface, so the request is judged not executed by form submission. Expected observation: the external operation gap is recorded.
- For retrieval scope, input the library identifier and the vector model identifier, then compare whether the two match: libraries across different vector models cannot be associated together. Exclude non-matching items and record the actual observation. Expected observation: cross-model retrieval comparison is not executed, and unsupported items are retained.