What the documents look like
General trade export declaration work handles four document types per shipment: the export declaration form, the commercial invoice, the packing list, and the contract. Compared with general trade import declaration, export declaration also affects export tax refund voucher matching. A field entered incorrectly can lead to document return and inspection, a declaration error, or a blocked tax refund. In store service and internal training, document clerks and customs broker staff align key fields across the contract, invoice, and packing list before moving into declaration form preparation. Data sources named in the category brief are the China International Trade Single Window, the customs code library, the forwarder bill of lading, and the enterprise ERP. The update frequency is per shipment.
The interactive forms step addresses a narrower question: handing source text of materials to be checked, and a draft sentence, to an interaction node. The node collects entered information or branches on a selection. Field validation, business approval, and write-back are carried by external systems or later nodes. The node itself does not include a business database function.
Constraints at the interactive forms step
The form input node is a user interaction node. When it triggers, the conversation enters an interaction state, the workflow state is recorded, and execution waits until the user completes the interaction. After submission, the node collects the form information the user filled in and passes it to later nodes. The user selection node is also a user interaction node, entering the same interaction state and recording workflow state. When the user makes a choice, the node judges that choice and executes the "yes" branch.
Neither node performs permission determination or business data isolation. Retrieval or form results do not constitute authorization. Optional paths such as image retrieval and reranking that appear in the documented flow require the corresponding image input and model capability, and do not run on every request. Libraries across different vector models cannot be associated together; the identifier must be checked first and non-matching items excluded, with actual observations recorded. During operational handover, materials sit in different states such as pending review, signed, or effective, and these cannot be treated as one.
Hypothetical exercise sample: a document clerk at a foreign trade company submits a paper material during store service training. The source text reads: "Contract number HX-2024-011, seller is a domestic foreign trade company, goods are stainless steel fasteners, quantity 500 cartons, trade term FOB Shanghai, signing date 5 March 2024, contract status is signed by both parties." One commercial invoice and one packing list accompany the same batch. The draft sentence to be judged is: "This contract is effective and can be used directly for export declaration form preparation." The check target: the contract status field states only "signed by both parties" and records no effectiveness clause or effective date. The draft sentence treats signing as effectiveness, which is unsupported.
Configuration and implementation checks
The table lists only documented settings or implementation check items relevant to the interactive forms step on this page. It does not treat database internals as required configuration for every page.
| Configuration item | Value or check method on this page | Basis and notes |
|---|---|---|
| Form input node | Enabled, used to collect contract number, invoice number, packing list number | The node collects entered information and passes it to later nodes |
| Required field check | Test missing contract number, missing invoice number, missing packing list number one at a time | Observe missing-item and completed-item behavior separately |
| User selection node | Set two branches: "materials complete" and "materials missing" | The node executes the "yes" branch according to the selection |
| Interaction state | Records workflow state and waits for interaction after triggering | Execution continues downward after interaction completes |
| Downstream division of work | Field validation, approval, and write-back are implemented by external systems or later nodes | The node does not include a business database function |
| Hypothetical trial starting point | Required field count set to 3, compared against the three identifier fields among the four document types in the sample | This is a hypothetical starting point for this exercise, not an official default value |
Three common errors
- Writing "signed by both parties" directly as "contract is effective." The error is treating signing status as effectiveness status while effectiveness clause or effective date evidence is absent. Check: input the sample source text and the draft sentence, compare whether the contract status field states effectiveness, and treat the condition as satisfied only when the source text contains an effectiveness statement.
- Treating the user selection node as a personnel directory or business data selector. The error is making the node carry permission or entity isolation. Check: input the "materials complete / materials missing" branch setting, compare whether the node only branches on the selection, and treat the condition as satisfied only when the node outputs no authorization conclusion.
- Treating retrieval or form submission as authorized execution. The error is assuming submission completes approval or write-back. Check: input the sample submission action, compare whether an external system approval record exists, and treat the condition as satisfied only when a clear approval result appears in the downstream system.
How to verify the setup
- Verification one: input the hypothetical sample source text and the draft sentence "This contract is effective and can be used directly for export declaration form preparation," compare the contract status field with the draft sentence wording, and when the source text states only "signed by both parties" without an effectiveness clause, judge the sentence unsupported and do not output "effective."
- Verification two: input three paper situations—missing contract number, missing invoice number, missing packing list number—and compare the required field check results. The condition is satisfied when the interaction state keeps waiting on a missing item and continues downward after the item is completed.
- Verification three: input an empty-result paper input [] and compare the downstream node design. The condition is satisfied when the downstream can accept the empty result and record the gap. This does not claim that a fictional rule retrieval necessarily returns []. All of the above are paper exercises and were not actually deployed or tested.