What the documents look like
In fresh-food weighing and sorting, fulfillment happens inside the warehouse, and the central fields are weight and specification. Data comes from the WMS, electronic scales, the order system, and quality-inspection photos. The typical materials are sorting task sheets, weighing labels, short-weight compensation forms, and quality-inspection records, updated per order or per day. For store service and internal training, workflow routing has to handle the form information submitted by sorters and quality-inspection supervisors, the choice decisions made about exception documents, and the handoff of those results to later nodes. The consequences of error are short-shipment compensation, gross-margin loss, and poor customer ratings, so the routing must keep weight, specification, and compensation basis checkable between nodes.
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 after the user completes the required information and submits, the node collects the submitted form information and passes it to later nodes. The User Selection node is also a user-interaction node: it enters the interaction state, and when the user makes a choice, the node judges that choice and executes the "yes" branch. These two nodes only collect information and judge branches. Order writes, document backfill, and external status synchronization require a separate business interface or a later process. A retrieval result or a form result cannot be treated as authorization to execute. During operational handover, the state of a material must be distinguished as submitted, pending review, or approved.
Hypothetical drill sample: a sorting task sheet states "Task sheet number X-001, product is leafy greens in the 500 g specification, sorter A submitted a weighing label of 498 g on 1 March, the quality-inspection record marks appearance as acceptable, and the short-weight compensation form has not been signed." One draft sentence awaiting judgment is "X-001 has completed short-weight compensation and has synchronized to the order system." The information needed to judge this is the signing status of the compensation form and the write record in the order system. Neither item is stated in the sample, so the sentence is unsupported.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration or check item | Use on this page | How to check |
|---|---|---|
| Form Input node | Collect required information from the sorting task sheet | After submission, compare the passed fields with the task sheet text |
| User Selection node | Apply a yes/no branch to the short-weight compensation form | Verify the yes-branch connection and the following node one by one |
| Interaction state recording | Confirm entry into the interaction state after triggering | Observe whether the conversation enters interaction and records state |
| Output handoff | Pass form information to a later retrieval or interface node | Compare output and input fields item by item |
| External operation split | Order writes and external synchronization use a separate interface | Check whether a corresponding downstream implementation exists |
| Hypothetical starting value | This paper exercise uses the 500 g specification as the comparison basis | Compare with the 498 g weighing label to obtain the difference |
The hypothetical starting value in the table is used only for this paper check. The 500 g figure is chosen because the sample task sheet states that specification, and the comparison object is the 498 g weighing label. It is not an official default value.
Three common errors
- Treating form submission as completed compensation. In the sample, the short-weight compensation form has not been signed, yet the draft sentence says compensation is complete and synchronized to the order system. The input is the compensation form status; the comparison objects are the signing record and the write record; the observable result is that neither item is stated.
- Treating a user-selection branch as authorization. The User Selection node only executes the yes branch and does not produce approval effect. In the sample, a pending-review state does not show that operating permission is absent, and it does not show that approval has been granted.
- Treating a retrieval result as entity isolation. A relevance score does not carry permission or entity filtering. Libraries built on different vector models cannot be associated together. The check is to verify identifiers first, exclude non-matching items, and record what is actually observed.
How to verify the setup
- Input the sample task sheet text and the draft sentence. Compare the compensation form signing status and the order system write record. When neither item is stated, judge the sentence as unsupported. Do not judge it as a denial or a conflict.
- Input the yes-branch choice from the sample. Compare the branch connection and the following node, and observe whether the corresponding path is executed according to the choice. Do not claim that this has been tested.
- Input an explicit paper-based empty result. Check whether the downstream design accepts that empty value. Do not claim that a fictional rule retrieval necessarily returns an empty result.