What the documents look like
Fruit-store procurement in this category runs on four recurring materials: purchase orders, acceptance sheets, pesticide-residue test reports, and loss records. Purchase orders carry variety, quantity, unit price, and supplier. Acceptance sheets carry the grade received, quantity differences, and deducted loss. Pesticide-residue reports carry a batch-level test conclusion. Loss records carry the store-side spoilage quantity. These materials are produced on a daily and per-batch rhythm, and matching them for contract and transaction comparison requires the same supplier, the same batch, and the same date to line up across a purchase order, an acceptance sheet, and a test report.
Compared with convenience-store prepared-food ordering, fruit procurement depends more on wholesale-market price movement and on grade inspection at receipt. The practical consequence for this page is that a comparison result has to be read against the actual field values in the source documents, because the acceptance grade and the accepted quantity are recorded by the receiving side and can differ from what the purchase order stated.
A clearly labelled hypothetical paper exercise is used below. It is not a real customer, a real supplier, or a completed transaction.
Hypothetical exercise sample. Purchase order text: "Supplier A, variety Red Fuji apple, grade Grade 1, quantity 200 boxes, unit price 80 yuan per box, arrival date 2025-03-10." Acceptance sheet text: "Supplier A, Red Fuji apple, arrived quantity 195 boxes, accepted grade Grade 1, deducted loss 5 boxes, acceptance date 2025-03-10." Pesticide-residue test report text: "Supplier A, Red Fuji apple, batch 20250310, test conclusion qualified." Draft sentence under review: "This batch of Red Fuji apples has the same purchase quantity as the accepted quantity, the same grade, and a qualified test, so contract and transaction material comparison can be completed." The draft sentence claims the quantities match, while the purchase order states 200 boxes and the acceptance sheet states 195 boxes. The same field carries different values.
Constraints at the tool calls step
Tool calls let the model decide from context whether to invoke a tool. A tool introduction states what the tool does. Tool parameters are fixed for system modules and configurable for plugins. Where a tool has a required parameter and no suitable value is present in context, the model may not call the tool, and a prompt can guide the user to supply the missing value. In advanced orchestration, available tools are connected to the tool call module, and the introduction can be edited so the call timing is more precise. The tool call termination node ends the current tool call, stops further tool calls, and stops the AI from summarising the tool result. Custom variables extend tool input so nodes that are not treated as tool parameters can also be called.
Two boundaries matter for this task. A retrieval result is not an authorisation. A form collects values; it does not complete business verification, approval, database writes, or external synchronisation, all of which need their stated downstream implementation. Nothing in the documented material establishes a scheduled trigger or a hidden control.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Hypothetical starting point for this exercise | Reason and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| Tool introduction | State the purpose of comparing purchase order, acceptance sheet, and test report | The introduction has to name the input conditions and the situations where the tool should not be called; compare it against the fields present in the sample materials |
| Tool parameters | Purchase order number, acceptance sheet number, test report batch number | System module parameters are fixed and plugin parameters are configurable; fill them according to the fields actually present in the sample |
| Required parameter | Purchase order number set as required | With no suitable value the model may not call the tool; compare against whether the sample supplies the number |
| Tool connection | Connect the material comparison tool to the tool call module | In advanced orchestration, connect a small number of tools first and observe whether call timing is precise |
| Tool call termination | Placed after the comparison tool | Termination stops further tool calls and AI summarisation; compare against whether later summarisation is needed |
| Custom variable | Fill in a loss record description | Extends tool input so the loss record node can be called |
Three common errors
- Treating a retrieval result as an authorisation basis. A retrieval returning a purchase order and an acceptance sheet means the materials were recalled, not that quantities match or that a contract has taken effect. Check: input the sample purchase order and acceptance sheet, compare the quantity fields, and observe whether a mismatch between 195 and 200 is reported.
- Treating a pending state as approved. In the sample, the draft sentence claims comparison can be completed, while the acceptance quantity differs from the purchase order. Check: input the draft sentence, compare its "same quantity" wording against the two source texts, and observe whether it is marked as pending verification.
- Treating tool call termination as automatic completion of the whole comparison. The termination node ends the current call and stops AI summarisation; it does not perform database writes or external synchronisation. Check: input the termination node configuration, compare its stated behaviour against the comparison steps the sample requires, and observe whether remaining fields still need manual checking.
How to verify the setup
- Input the sample purchase order text "quantity 200 boxes" and the acceptance sheet text "arrived quantity 195 boxes". Compare the values in the same field. The condition is met when the output states that the two values differ.
- Input the draft sentence "the purchase quantity matches the accepted quantity". Compare that sentence against the quantity fields in the two source texts. The condition is met when the sentence is not treated as verified.
- Input the sample test report text "batch 20250310, test conclusion qualified". Compare the batch number against the purchase order arrival date. The condition is met when the batch number can be associated and the conclusion is listed separately. If the input is an empty list, check whether the downstream design distinguishes an empty result from an unsupported claim, without asserting that an empty result necessarily returns empty.
Across all three checks, a same-subject, same-period, same-field comparison is required. Only explicitly mutually exclusive values in the same field count as a contradiction. Values that are not stated, or that cover only a related stage, remain unsupported or pending verification. A pending review does not show that an operating permission is absent. Signing, reaching cooperation, and contract effectiveness are three separate facts. A quotation validity period does not indicate a supply period. Where the evidence needed for a check is missing, the gap is recorded as missing rather than filled with an assumed authorisation or effectiveness clause.