What the documents look like
Sample inspection happens before a livestream session. The question being answered is whether a product can be sold and whether it suits on-camera demonstration. The working materials are supplier profiles, testing-agency reports, platform negative catalogs and historical return rates. Day-to-day documents include sample evaluation forms, quality inspection reports, supplier qualifications and prohibited-sale lists. These materials update weekly and per item.
The procurement and supplier-profile task requires chaining the fields and statuses in those documents into a traceable routing record. Update frequency does not by itself determine node behavior; nodes advance only through their trigger and interaction states.
Constraints at the workflow routing step
A Form Input node, once triggered, puts the conversation into an interaction state, collects required information, and passes that information to subsequent nodes after submission. A User Selection node executes the corresponding "yes" branch after the user makes a choice. Both are user-interaction nodes; both can be added repeatedly and both trigger execution. The interaction state is recorded by the node itself, and no separate global state-recording switch exists. Collected information must be explicitly passed to later retrieval, decision or interface nodes.
Order writing, document backfill and external status synchronization require a separate business interface or a later process. Retrieval and forms do not constitute authorized execution.
Hypothetical paper exercise. Source text for comparison: a supplier-submitted sample evaluation form states "Sample name: portable juicer cup; sample submission date: 10 March 2025; evaluation conclusion: pending quality inspection confirmation." The accompanying supplier qualification document states "business license valid until 31 December 2026." The handover request to be judged is: "Mark the above sample evaluation form as quality-inspection passed and synchronize it to the procurement list." That request writes a pending-inspection status as passed and asks for a synchronization action that has not been connected, so it is unsupported.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration or check item | Setting or implementation check relevant to this page | Correspondence to the sample |
|---|---|---|
| Form Input node | Entering interaction state on trigger, collecting required information, passing it to later nodes after submission | Collect sample name, submission date, evaluation conclusion |
| User Selection node | Executing the corresponding "yes" branch after the user makes a choice | Provide selection branches for "quality inspection confirmed or not" |
| Interaction state check | State recording is node behavior; no separate global state-recording switch | Check whether sample routing remains in the interaction state |
| Output handoff check | Explicitly pass collected information to later retrieval, decision or interface nodes | Compare output fields against input fields item by item |
| External action division | Order writing, document backfill and external status synchronization require a separate business interface or later process | Procurement list synchronization is not completed inside the node |
| Hypothetical exercise starting value | This hypothetical exercise sets the "evaluation conclusion" field starting value to "pending quality inspection confirmation," compared against the quality inspection report conclusion | That starting value comes from the sample source text, not an official default |
Three common errors
- Treating "pending quality inspection confirmation" as quality-inspection passed. The sample source text states only pending quality inspection confirmation, and no quality inspection report conclusion exists, so that status is unsupported. Executable check: input the sample evaluation form source text, compare the value of the "evaluation conclusion" field, and if it remains pending quality inspection confirmation, the passed branch must not be entered.
- Treating form submission as procurement list synchronization completed. Node submission only passes information to later nodes; synchronization requires a separate business interface. Executable check: input the handover request source text, compare the requested action against the list of connected nodes, and if no synchronization interface appears in that list, record the action as not executed.
- Treating supplier qualification validity as grounds for the sample being sellable. The qualification document states only a business license validity period, which is a different field from a sample quality conclusion. Executable check: input both source texts, compare subject, object and field, and if the fields differ, record them separately without merging them into one judgment.
How to verify the setup
- Verification one: input the sample evaluation form source text and the handover request source text, compare the "evaluation conclusion" field against the "quality-inspection passed" wording in the request. If the source text says pending quality inspection confirmation while the request says passed, judge the request unsupported and preserve the evidence gap.
- Verification two: input the synchronization action named in the handover request, compare it against the list of connected nodes. If no corresponding interface appears in that list, record the action as not executed, and do not infer a system error or automatic completion.
- Verification three: input the supplier qualification validity period and the sample evaluation form, compare subject and field. If the subject is the same while the fields are respectively qualification validity and quality conclusion, record them separately and do not derive a sellable-sample conclusion from them.
Retrieval and relevance scores do not carry permission or entity isolation. Libraries built on different vector models cannot be associated together; verify identifiers first, exclude non-conforming ones, and record the actual observation. For empty-result handoff, a paper input of [] can be used to check downstream design, without claiming that a fabricated-rule retrieval necessarily returns [].
This page addresses only livestream sample inspection and selection / procurement and supplier profiles / workflow routing. During operational handover, which materials, actions and requests sit at which authorization state must be kept distinct; retrieval and forms must not be treated as authorized execution.