What the documents look like
Refund and return handling for ordinary marketplace orders occurs continuously, order by order, and does not necessarily connect to a promise made in a single livestream session. For operating reports and exception reviews, this means the working material accumulates per order: refund applications, return logistics notes, quality-inspection photos, and refund approvals. The data sources sit in the platform after-sales backend, customer-service chat, WMS receiving, and payment refund records, with updates occurring per order and daily.
This page addresses one step only: workflow routing inside operating reports and exception reviews. It covers which materials, operations, and requests sit at which authorization state, and it treats retrieval and forms as collection and routing mechanisms rather than as authorization to execute a refund, a write, or an external synchronization.
A hypothetical paper exercise sample is used throughout. Source text one: "Refund application A-1, order number O-1, application date 10 March 2025, refund amount 120 yuan, status is pending review." Source text two: "Return logistics note L-1, signed-for date 14 March 2025, receiving warehouse W-1, inspection conclusion: visible damage." Source text three: "Refund approval P-1, approval status is pending review." The draft sentence under review is: "This order has completed the refund and synchronized with the payment channel." That sentence depends on a payment refund record field that the sample does not provide.
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 interaction the workflow continues downward. The node collects required form information and passes it to later nodes. The User Selection node behaves the same way at the interaction boundary: when the user makes a choice, the node evaluates that choice and executes the corresponding "yes" branch. The recorded interaction state is behavior of the interaction node; no separate global state-recording switch is documented.
Information collected at these nodes must be explicitly passed to later retrieval, judgment, or interface nodes. Order writes, document backfill, and external status synchronization require a separate business interface or a later process. Retrieval and relevance scores do not carry permission or entity-isolation duties, so a retrieval hit is not an authorization and does not by itself permit an external sync.
For the paper exercise, the refund amount field is compared against a hypothetical trial starting value of 100 yuan. That value is chosen only to separate the sample amount of 120 yuan from smaller cases, and it is compared directly against the sample amount. It is a hypothetical trial starting point for this exercise, not an official default.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Relevant setting or implementation check on this page | Relationship to the sample |
|---|---|---|
| Form Input node | On trigger, enters interaction state, collects required information, passes it to later nodes | Used to collect refund application fields; check whether submission passes them on |
| User Selection node | After the user chooses, executes the corresponding "yes" branch | Used for the responsibility-judgment branch; verify each branch connection |
| Interaction state check | Recorded state is behavior of the interaction node; no separate global switch | Check the observable entry into and exit from the interaction state |
| Output handoff check | Collected information is explicitly passed to later retrieval, judgment, or interface nodes | Compare each output against its input item by item |
| External action split | Order writes, document backfill, and external status sync require a separate business interface or later process | Payment-channel sync is not completed inside these nodes |
| Hypothetical trial starting value | Refund amount field compared against 100 yuan, chosen to separate the 120 yuan sample from smaller cases | Compared directly against the sample amount; a trial starting point, not an official default |
Three common errors
- Treating a pending-review status as a completed refund. The input is refund approval P-1 with status "pending review." If the draft sentence states that the refund is completed, the compared field is the approval status, and the two values do not match. The statement is unsupported by the sample.
- Treating a retrieval hit as authorized execution. The input is a refund application returned by one retrieval. The comparison object is the authorization boundary. The observed result is that the retrieval carries no approval or payment-write permission, so it cannot trigger an external sync.
- Treating a signed-for date as a refund arrival date. The input is return logistics note L-1 with signed-for date 14 March 2025. The compared field is the payment refund record date. The sample does not provide that field, so this remains an evidence gap.
How to verify the setup
- Input source text one together with the draft sentence "This order has completed the refund and synchronized with the payment channel." Compare the approval status field and the payment refund record field. If neither field states completion or synchronization, the draft sentence does not hold and is recorded as pending verification.
- Input the "yes" branch connection of the User Selection node. Compare the branch exit against the downstream node. If the choice executes only the corresponding branch and performs no unauthorized order write, the connection check passes. If the branch points to an external sync with no interface node, record it as a missing implementation.
- Input an explicit paper empty result
[]. Compare the downstream handoff design and observe whether the downstream handles an empty input. If the downstream design depends on non-empty records and defines no empty branch, record it as pending supplementation. Do not claim that retrieval necessarily returns an empty result.
Across these checks, the same subject, the same period, and the same field must be compared. Only explicitly mutually exclusive values in the same field count as a contradiction. Unstated fields, or evidence that covers only a related stage, are recorded as unsupported or pending verification. A pending-review status does not demonstrate the absence of operating permission, and an unsigned item is not a completed action.