What the documents look like
Fresh-food supplier claims pursue responsibility for quality at arrival. This differs from near-expiry markdown handling, which addresses natural store loss. The main data sources are the quality inspection system, WMS receiving, supplier contracts, and financial reconciliation. Daily documents include quality abnormality forms, photo evidence, deduction notices, and claim reconciliation statements. Data updates on two rhythms: per batch and monthly. This page's feature does not depend on batch synchronization or real-time triggers.
In store service and internal training, three steps consume the most time: securing evidence, calculating deductions, and negotiating replenishment or compensation. Workflow routing must separate the inputs, interactions, and downstream handoffs for these three steps. The quality abnormality form carries the batch identity, arrival date, and inspection finding. Photo evidence fixes the condition at arrival. The deduction notice states a proposed amount. The claim reconciliation statement aggregates what remains open. Routing decides which of these documents reach a person, which reach a later node, and which require a business interface before any external action occurs.
Constraints at the workflow routing 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 the dialog is hidden. After the user completes required fields and submits, the node collects the submitted form information and passes it to subsequent nodes. The user selection node is also a user interaction node with the same interaction-state behavior. When the user makes a choice, the node judges that choice and executes the corresponding yes branch. The documentation does not describe a global state-recording switch, a submission-count limit, an automatic judgment rule, or a snapshot guarantee.
Collected information must be explicitly passed to later retrieval, judgment, or interface nodes, and output must be compared item by item against input. Order writing, document backfill, and external status synchronization require a separate business interface or downstream process. Retrieval and forms do not constitute authorization. A relevance score is not a category, entity, or permission filter. Retrieval is not authorization.
Hypothetical drill sample: A store submits a quality abnormality form reading "Arrival batch A-0312 on 12 March 2025; sampling found an elevated proportion of yellow leaves in leafy vegetables; three photos attached; request deduction under contract Appendix 2." The same batch carries a deduction notice draft reading "The deduction amount for this batch has been confirmed by quality inspection; the supplier is asked to confirm within three days." The pending request is "submit this draft directly to the supplier and synchronize the financial deduction." The material contains subject, object, date, and batch scope. It lacks supplier confirmation and a financial authorization boundary.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Purpose on this page | Verification method |
|---|---|---|
| Form input node | Collect required fields of the quality abnormality form | After submission, compare whether fields are passed completely to later nodes |
| User selection node | Let the user choose between replenishment and compensation | Verify each yes branch connection against the selection result |
| Interaction state check | Confirm the node enters interaction state and records state | Observe dialog hiding and state recording behavior |
| Output handoff check | Pass collected information to retrieval or judgment nodes | Compare input values against downstream received values item by item |
| External action boundary | Interface boundary for deduction notice and financial synchronization | Confirm a business interface carries this, not the form itself |
The hypothetical starting value for this drill is three required form fields. The reason is that the sample carries batch, date, and photo information as three field groups. The comparison object is the number of fields actually received by downstream nodes after submission. This is a starting value for the drill, not an official default.
Three common errors
- Treating form submission as authorized execution. Input is the deduction notice draft text. Comparison object is the supplier confirmation and financial authorization record. Observable result is a deduction action appearing while the confirmation record is missing.
- Treating the user selection node's yes branch as the only path. Input is the user selection result. Comparison object is each branch connection. Observable result is an unconnected or incorrectly connected branch.
- Treating retrieval results as a permission filter. Input is the returned retrieval records. Comparison object is the access permission list. Observable result is unrelated or unauthorized records appearing in later nodes.
How to verify the setup
- Verification one: Input the hypothetical sample's quality abnormality form text and deduction notice draft. Compare whether the draft contains a supplier confirmation field. Expected result: when the draft lacks a confirmation record, the downstream step does not execute a financial deduction.
- Verification two: Input the user selection node's selection result. Compare each yes branch connection. Expected result: the selection result matches branch execution, and unconnected branches do not execute.
- Verification three: Input the empty-result handoff design. Use an explicit paper input of
[]to check the downstream node. Expected result: the downstream node handles the empty result as designed. Do not claim that a rule-based retrieval necessarily returns[].
All three verifications rely on observation and failure-branch records. They do not guarantee a first-hit match or full recall. Libraries across different vector models cannot be associated together. Check identifiers first and exclude non-conforming ones, then record actual observations. Where a system error code or automatic business action is not documented, describe what to compare and what remains unknown. A pending request is not approval. An offered option is not execution. An unsigned termination is not a completed termination.