What the documents look like
Returned-goods warehouse inspection handles reverse parcels and product grading. It does not handle outbound picking and packing for new orders. The working materials come from the WMS returns module, platform after-sales records, carrier return records, and the inspection bench. The daily documents are the return warehouse receipt, inspection photos, the grade determination sheet, and the resale listing form. These materials update per item and per day, and each returned item moves through scanning, condition judgment, and a resale-or-scrap decision one piece at a time.
For contract and transaction material comparison, the task is narrower than the full inspection workflow. The comparison checks whether the party, product, quantity, and status recorded on the return warehouse receipt agree with the platform after-sales record and the carrier return information. The supplied material gives per-item and daily frequency. It does not support a conclusion of batch synchronization, full synchronization, real-time triggering, or transaction-triggered mechanisms.
Constraints at the workflow routing step
Workflow routing at this step separates three things: the input for contract and transaction material comparison, human confirmation, and downstream actions. The form input node, once triggered, puts the conversation into an interaction state, collects required information, and passes that information to later nodes after submission. The user selection node executes the corresponding branch after the user makes a choice. Interaction state and state recording are existing behavior of these two nodes. No separate global state switch is introduced here.
Collected information must be explicitly passed to later retrieval, judgment, or interface nodes, and output must be compared against input item by item. Order writing, document backfill, and external status synchronization require a separate business interface or a later process. Retrieval and forms do not by themselves constitute authorized execution.
Hypothetical drill sample: the source text available for comparison reads: "Return warehouse receipt RH-2026-0417-018 states: the party is a certain after-sales warehouse, the product is a certain model of Bluetooth earphone, the quantity is 2 units, and the inbound status is pending inspection; platform after-sales order SH-2026-0417-233 states the same order number, the same product and quantity, and the after-sales status is return approved; the carrier return record states 2 units signed for, signed on 17 April 2026." The draft sentence to be judged reads: "This return has completed inspection and is approved for resale listing." The draft sentence concerns an inspection conclusion and a listing authorization. The source text does not state an inspection result or a listing decision, so the draft sentence is unsupported.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Value or check method on this page | Basis and explanation |
|---|---|---|
| Form input node | Collect return warehouse receipt number, platform after-sales order number, product, quantity | After the node triggers, the conversation enters the interaction state; on submission the values pass to later nodes |
| User selection node | Set branches for "materials consistent" and "manual review required" | After the user makes a choice, the corresponding branch executes; verify each connection |
| Output handoff check | Explicitly pass form information to a later retrieval or judgment node | Compare output against input item by item |
| Interaction state check | Check that triggering enters the interaction state and records state | This is existing node behavior; no separate global switch is set |
| External action separation | Resale listing and inventory writing connect to a separate business interface | Forms and retrieval do not perform authorization or writing |
| Hypothetical trial starting point | This sample uses 2 units as the comparison quantity | Taken from the sample source text and compared with the after-sales order and carrier return record quantities |
Three common errors
- Treating the return warehouse receipt number collected by the form as proof that inspection is complete. In the sample the inbound status is pending inspection. The form only collects values; the inspection conclusion and listing authorization must come from a later process or human review.
- Treating the branch choice on the user selection node as an executed resale listing. The sample draft sentence says "has completed inspection and is approved for resale listing." User selection only executes a branch; it does not complete a business action.
- Treating a retrieval hit as authorization or entity isolation. Retrieval does not perform permission judgment. A similarity setting does not exclude unrelated businesses or unauthorized records. Libraries built on different vector models cannot be associated together.
How to verify the setup
- Input the sample source text and the draft sentence. Compare the draft sentence "has completed inspection and is approved for resale listing" with the source text's "inbound status is pending inspection." Observe whether inspection result and listing decision fields appear. The source text does not state them, so the expected result is unsupported, and the evidence gap remains.
- Input the order numbers, product, and quantity from the three sample materials. Compare whether the return warehouse receipt, the platform after-sales order, and the carrier return record share the same party, the same period, and the same field. All three quantities in the sample are 2 units, so the expected result is consistent. A contradiction is recorded only when a quantity differs on the same field and the values are mutually exclusive.
- Check whether the output after form input node submission is explicitly passed to a later node. Compare the passed fields with the fields the later node receives, item by item. If the later node does not receive the return warehouse receipt number, the expected result is a missing handoff. Record the actual observation and do not infer a system error cause.