What the documents look like
Central chain procurement materials centre on headquarters purchasing and distribution. The daily documents are group procurement contracts, replenishment plans, distribution notes and store requisition forms. Data arrives from ERP purchasing, WMS, store POS and supplier delivery records, and these materials update daily or weekly. The comparison task places contracted items, quantities and delivery conditions beside the later replenishment, distribution and requisition records, checking them under the same entity, the same period and the same field.
Workflow routing handles two actions in this task. The form input node collects the required information for comparison. The user selection node lets an operator decide on an unresolved item and move into the matching branch. Both nodes are user interaction nodes: when triggered, the dialogue enters an interaction state, the workflow state is recorded, and execution continues after the user completes the interaction.
Two features of this category shape the routing work. Contract and transaction documents sit in different systems, so field definitions may not align, and the form input node passes collected information to later nodes, which makes the output-to-input correspondence something to confirm item by item. The user selection node executes the "yes" branch after the user makes a choice, so each branch connection needs separate verification.
Constraints at the workflow routing step
The form input node collects required fields and passes them downstream. Routing therefore has to confirm, field by field, that each output matches the input of the later retrieval, judgement or interface node. The user selection node acts on user feedback and runs the corresponding branch, and every branch connection is verified on its own.
Order writing, document backfill and external status synchronisation require a separate business interface or a later process. Retrieval and form collection do not constitute authorised execution. During operational handover, the authorisation state of materials, actions and requests is checked separately; a retrieval result or a form submission is not an approval or a completed execution.
Hypothetical exercise sample
Material text for checking (hypothetical):
"Group procurement contract HT-2024-031 states: supplier A supplies item A to the chain headquarters, unit price 12.00, supply period 1 March 2024 to 31 March 2024, delivered to the headquarters distribution centre."
"Distribution note PS-2024-0315 records: 15 March 2024, item A, quantity 500, unit price 12.00, receiving party the headquarters distribution centre."
Draft sentence to be assessed: "This distribution note has completed all supply obligations under the contract."
Comparison points: the contract states a supply period and a unit price; the distribution note records one delivery with a quantity and a unit price. The distribution note does not state cumulative delivered quantity under the contract, and it does not state whether the contract has been fully performed. The phrase "all supply obligations" has no supporting field in the materials, so it remains unsupported and cannot be judged complete or incomplete.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Relation to this page's task | Hypothetical starting point and reason |
|---|---|---|
| Required fields of the form input node | Collects the entity, contract number, distribution note number, item and period needed for comparison | Contract number, distribution note number, item and date range, covering the minimum information for same-entity, same-period, same-field checking |
| Output handover of the form input node | Passes collected information to a later retrieval or judgement node | Confirm item by item that output field names match downstream input field names |
| Branches of the user selection node | Decides on an unresolved item and enters the matching branch | Two branches, "consistent" and "to be verified", with each branch connection verified separately |
| Interaction state check | The node enters an interaction state and records workflow state when triggered | Observe that the dialogue is in the interaction state before submission and continues after submission |
| Division of external actions | Order writing, document backfill, external status synchronisation | Confirm whether these actions already have a separate business interface; record a gap when none is connected |
| Retrieval scope check | Materials needed for checking must sit in an accessible target retrieval scope or in explicit manual input | Confirm whether contract and distribution note are in the same accessible scope; record a gap when they are not |
Three common errors
- Treating a single delivery record on a distribution note as evidence that all contract obligations are complete. Distribution note PS-2024-0315 records only item A, quantity 500, unit price 12.00 on 15 March 2024. It states no cumulative delivered quantity and no completed-performance status. The draft sentence "This distribution note has completed all supply obligations under the contract" has no supporting field.
- Treating a form submission as authorised execution. The form input node collects required information and passes it to later nodes; the submission itself is not an approval, an order write or an external synchronisation. Operational handover keeps form submission and business authorisation separate.
- Treating a retrieval result as a basis for permission or entity isolation. Semantic recall and relevance scores do not perform permission or entity isolation. Libraries built on different vector models cannot be associated together; identifiers are checked first, non-matching items are excluded, and the actual observation is recorded.
How to verify the setup
- Check the form output handover with the hypothetical sample. Input: contract number HT-2024-031, distribution note number PS-2024-0315, item A, date range 1 March 2024 to 31 March 2024. Compare: whether the form output fields are passed completely to the input of the later retrieval or judgement node. The condition is met when the downstream node receives all four items and the field names correspond.
- Check the user selection branch with the hypothetical sample. Input: the draft sentence "This distribution note has completed all supply obligations under the contract." Compare: whether the workflow executes the "to be verified" branch after the user selects it. The condition is met when the selection enters that branch and the workflow remains in the interaction state without a selection. Because the draft sentence lacks a cumulative delivered quantity field, it is expected to enter "to be verified".
- Check downstream handling with a paper-based empty result. Input: retrieval returns an empty result []. Compare: how the downstream node is designed to handle an empty result. The condition is met when the downstream node has an explicit handling path for the empty result and does not treat it as verified or authorised. This is a paper check and does not claim that a fictional rule retrieval necessarily returns empty.