What the documents look like
Price and display audits take place during routine trading periods, not during franchise onboarding. The material set moves on a weekly and monthly rhythm. Store visit photographs capture shelf and price tag conditions at the moment of capture. Price tag lists state the item and its listed price. Display standards set the placement requirements. Rectification notices carry the issue items and the store reply. These four document types form the main inputs for workflow routing in store service and internal training.
The materials do not carry approval conclusions on their own. A store visit photograph reflects only the frame that was taken. A rectification notice states only that a rectification request was issued. Treating a photograph, list, standard or notice as an authorization credential steps past the verification stage. The audit cycle runs on weekly and monthly updates, and that cadence affects how quickly a routing step can rely on a document still being current.
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 fields and submits, the node passes the collected information to the following nodes. The user selection node is also a user interaction node. When it triggers, the conversation enters an interaction state, and when the user makes a choice, the node evaluates that choice and executes the "yes" branch. Both nodes can be added repeatedly and trigger execution.
The constraint is that interaction nodes collect entered values and selection results. Business verification, approval, database writes and external synchronization require a separate business interface or a subsequent process. Retrieval and forms do not constitute authorized execution. Branch connections need to be verified one by one, and output handoff needs to be compared item by item between input and output.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample (paper material, not a real record):
Source text one: "The East China regional supervisor submitted three store visit photographs on 10 March 2025, taken at the fresh produce area of Store A, showing a price tag of 9.9 yuan for one item."
Source text two: "On the same date, the price tag list records the system price for that item as 10.9 yuan, with a list version date of 10 March 2025."
Proposed draft sentence: "The photograph and the list agree, and the price tag was executed correctly."
The fields needed for that judgment are the same item, the same date and the same price field. The photograph shows 9.9 yuan and the list records 10.9 yuan. The values for the same field are mutually exclusive, so the proposed draft sentence is not supported. That conclusion applies only to this sample and does not extend to other stores or dates.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Type | Relationship to this page's sample |
|---|---|---|
| Form input node | User interaction node | Collects required fields such as store, item, date and listed price, then passes them to later nodes after submission |
| User selection node | User interaction node | Presents the choice of whether the photograph and the list agree, then executes the "yes" branch |
| Interaction state check | Implementation check | Confirms that triggering enters the interaction state and records state; no separate global switch is set |
| Output handoff check | Implementation check | Compares form output against the input of the following retrieval, judgment or interface node |
| External operation split | Implementation check | Rectification write-back and status synchronization connect to a business interface and are not folded into the interaction node |
| Hypothetical trial starting point | Hypothetical value for this page | The sample uses a price difference of 0.1 yuan as a comparison threshold starting point to demonstrate the mutually exclusive same-field judgment; this is not an official default value |
Three common errors
- Treating form submission as completed approval. The form input node collects required information and passes it on. The submission action itself does not produce an approval conclusion. In the sample, the supervisor submitting the photograph and the list completes information collection only.
- Treating a retrieval hit as a permission pass. Semantic recall and relevance scores do not carry permission or entity isolation. In the sample, retrieving a record for a store does not mean that store's data is open to the current requester.
- Treating the interaction state record as a snapshot guarantee. The interaction node records workflow state, and the documentation does not describe a submission count limit or an automatic judgment mechanism. In the sample, one submission does not constitute a consistent guarantee of later state.
How to verify the setup
- Input source text one and source text two from the sample, then compare whether the photograph price of 9.9 yuan and the list price of 10.9 yuan belong to the same item, the same date and the same price field. When the two values are mutually exclusive, the proposed draft sentence "they agree, and the price tag was executed correctly" does not hold and should be recorded as pending verification. If the two values were the same, that sentence would be supported on that field.
- Input the proposed draft sentence and check whether it states the subject, object, date and field scope. The sample sentence does not label the item or the date. The comparison shows the judgment scope is unclear, and the fields need to be added before a judgment can be made.
- Input a rectification-notice type request and compare whether the request states an authorization status. The sample provides no signed or approved record, so the request remains in a pending state and does not constitute completed execution. Missing evidence stays as a gap and no authorization clause is supplied to fill it.
These three checks use the same hypothetical paper sample given above. They compare an input against a stated field or status and describe what would be observed. They do not report a completed test, a deployment or an approval.