What the documents look like
Wholesale market stall trading is more fragmented than regional distributor replenishment. It relies on on-site bargaining and consignment shipping, and the material set is correspondingly loose. The data sources named in the brief are wholesale market quotations, stall inventory, WeChat payment records and logistics consignment notes. The documents handled day to day are purchase slips, handwritten sales slips, stall lease contracts and payment receipts. Operating reporting and exception review must reconcile payment, dispatch and balance status against this material.
The brief gives an update frequency of daily and per order. This page does not need that frequency to define the routing behavior, so it is not extended into batch synchronization, real-time processing or transaction-triggered mechanisms.
The workflow routing step for this task does not itself verify money, dispatch or contract effect. It collects review fields through interaction nodes and passes what was collected to later nodes. Business verification, order writing, document backfill and external status synchronization require a separate business interface or a later process. Retrieval remains retrieval and does not carry authorization judgment.
Constraints at the workflow routing step
The Form Input node is a user interaction node. When it is triggered, the conversation enters an interaction state and the workflow state is recorded. After the user completes the 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. When it is triggered, the conversation enters an interaction state and the workflow state is recorded. When the user makes a choice, the node judges that choice and executes the "yes" branch. Both nodes can be added repeatedly and both trigger execution.
The recorded interaction state is behavior of the interaction nodes. No separate global state-recording switch is documented, and none is asserted here. Information collected at a form node must be explicitly passed to a later retrieval, judgment or interface node, and the output must be compared item by item against that input. Order writing, document backfill and external status synchronization require a separate business interface or a later process. A relevance score is not a category, entity or permission filter, and retrieval is not authorization.
Hypothetical drill sample, used only for the checks on this page. Source text: "Stall A issued a handwritten sales slip to Buyer B on 10 March 2025 for goods payment of 4,800 yuan, agreed to be settled within three days after consignment. A payment receipt dated 12 March 2025 records receipt of 3,000 yuan; the remaining 1,800 yuan has no recorded settlement date." Draft sentence to be judged: "Buyer B has settled the full goods payment on the 10 March 2025 sales slip." The comparison result is not supported. The receipt records only 3,000 yuan received, and the status of the remaining balance is absent from the material. This is a paper comparison, not a test that was run.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Type | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Required fields on the Form Input node | Node setting | Collect the fields the review needs, such as slip number, amount and settlement status, and pass them to later nodes after submission |
| Branch connection on the User Selection node | Node connection | After the user makes a choice the "yes" branch executes; verify each branch connection individually |
| Interaction state check | Implementation check | Confirm that triggering enters the interaction state and records state; do not claim a global state switch |
| Output handoff check | Implementation check | Compare collected information item by item against the input of the later retrieval, judgment or interface node |
| External action split | Implementation check | Order writing, document backfill and external status synchronization connect to a separate business interface or later process |
| Sample comparison starting point | Hypothetical trial starting point | Use the sample amounts of 4,800 yuan and 3,000 yuan as the starting point for this comparison, against the amount recorded on the receipt |
The 4,800 yuan figure is chosen because it is the goods payment stated on the handwritten sales slip in the sample, and the 3,000 yuan figure is chosen because it is the amount the receipt records as received. The comparison method is a direct reading of the two stated amounts and of whether the receipt states a settlement date for the remainder.
Three common errors
- Treating form submission as authorized execution. In the sample, the form may collect a settlement-status field, and that collection does not mean the goods payment is settled. The submitted value must be compared against the amount recorded on the receipt, and where the balance status is absent, the gap is recorded as a gap.
- Treating the "yes" branch of User Selection as business confirmation. The branch indicates only that the user made that choice. It does not indicate that the balance was received, that consignment was completed, or that a contract took effect.
- Treating a retrieval result as a permission filter. Retrieval does not judge whether a stall or a buyer is entitled to view a record. A similarity score is not a basis for authorization, and retrieval does not exclude unrelated businesses or unauthorized records.
How to verify the setup
- Input the sample source text and the draft sentence. Compare "has settled the full goods payment" against the receipt wording "received 3,000 yuan; the remaining 1,800 yuan has no recorded settlement date." If the balance status is absent, the result is not supported; it is not recorded as settled and not recorded as contradictory. The expected observation is that the draft sentence lacks support in the material, and the missing balance status stays missing.
- Input the sample clause "agreed to be settled within three days after consignment" and compare it against the date recorded on the receipt. Check whether any settlement record appears. Where no record appears, the item is recorded as pending verification. No authorization term or effective clause is supplied to produce a definite answer.
- Input an explicit paper empty result, [], and check whether the downstream node handles it through the empty-result branch. This check verifies the downstream design only. It does not claim that a retrieval of a fictional rule returns []. The expected observation is that the downstream node's empty-result handling is confirmed by design, and no retrieval outcome is asserted.
Across all three checks, the judgment must concern the same subject, the same period and the same field. Only mutually exclusive values stated in the same field count as a contradiction. An unstated value, or evidence covering only a related stage, is recorded as not supported or pending verification, and the evidence gap is preserved rather than filled with an assumed authorization or effective clause.