What the documents look like
Regional dealer stock replenishment runs as a daily rolling order process, which differs from seasonal centralised ordering at a trade fair. The main document set is made up of replenishment requests, inventory turnover tables, outbound delivery notes and payment plans. Sources named in the brief are the dealer ERP, the brand ordering system, warehouse inventory and sales receipts. The brief gives weekly and monthly update frequencies only; it does not extend to real-time synchronisation or transaction-triggered mechanisms.
In a cross-border setting, the same replenishment fact may appear as a Chinese-language request, a foreign-language outbound delivery note or a multilingual payment plan. Retrieval therefore has to locate material about the same subject, the same period and the same field across languages. The brief rates its own confidence as broadly indicative, so any detail not stated remains conditional rather than settled.
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, the workflow state is recorded, and after the user completes the required information and submits, the collected values are passed to later nodes. The user selection node is also a user interaction node: when triggered the conversation enters an interaction state, and when the user makes a choice the node evaluates that choice and executes the "yes" branch. Interaction waiting, state recording and hiding the dialogue box are documented node behaviours. The documents do not describe a corresponding control switch, a submission-count limit or automatic judgement capability.
Retrieval locates material; it does not perform authorisation judgement. Semantic recall and relevance scores do not constitute a permission filter or an entity isolation boundary. Order writing, document backfill and external status synchronisation require a separate business interface or a later process. Libraries built on different vector models cannot be associated together; the work is to check identifiers, exclude non-matching libraries and record what is actually observed.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample. A replenishment request reads: "Applicant: East China regional dealer A; Object: model X stock replenishment; Period: March 2025; Status is pending review by the brand channel manager." An outbound delivery note reads: "Issuing party: brand warehouse; Object: model X; Period: March 2025; Status: dispatched." A proposed handover request states: "This replenishment request has been approved and dispatch may proceed." In that request, "has been approved" and the source wording "pending review" are mutually exclusive values in the status field. The delivery note status "dispatched" is stage evidence about a different object and does not support approval of the request.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Type | Link to this page's documents |
|---|---|---|
| Required fields on the form input node | Existing node behaviour | Collects applicant, object, period and status of the replenishment request; passes them on after submission |
| Branch connection of the user selection node | Existing node behaviour | Executes the "yes" branch after the user makes a choice; verify each branch connection individually |
| Interaction state check | Manual verification action | Confirms the recorded state is node behaviour; no global state-recording switch is set |
| Output handover check | Implementation check item | Passes collected values explicitly to a retrieval, judgement or interface node; compares input and output item by item |
| Vector model identifier check for retrieval libraries | Implementation check item | Checks whether the libraries being associated share one vector model; excludes those that do not match |
| Division of external operations | Requires a separate system implementation | Order writing, document backfill and external status synchronisation connect to a business interface or later process |
Hypothetical starting value for this page: the required fields on the form input node are set to four items. The reason is that the sample source text happens to contain four judgement elements: applicant, object, period and status. The comparison method is to check each collected value against the corresponding field in the source text. This starting value is a hypothetical setting for this exercise, not an official default.
Three common errors
- Treating a retrieval hit as authorisation. Input: the proposed request "This replenishment request has been approved and dispatch may proceed." If approval is concluded merely because the replenishment request text was retrieved, the comparison object should be the source status field "pending review." The observable result is that the status field and "has been approved" do not agree, so the conclusion is unsupported.
- Treating a delivery note status as evidence of request approval. Input: the delivery note wording "Status: dispatched." The comparison object should be the status field of the replenishment request. The observable result is that the two documents concern different subjects and objects, so the delivery note does not support approval of the request.
- Treating the interaction state record as a global switch. Input: the interaction state after the form input node is triggered. The comparison object is the documented node behaviour of recording the workflow state. The observable result is that the documents do not describe a global state-recording switch, so such a switch should not be configured or claimed.
How to verify the setup
- For the sample proposed request, input "This replenishment request has been approved and dispatch may proceed" together with the replenishment request source text. Compare the status field "pending review" with "has been approved." The observable result is that the two values are mutually exclusive in the same field, so the conclusion is unsupported.
- For the outbound delivery note source text, input "Status: dispatched" together with the replenishment request source text. Compare the subject and object fields. The observable result is that the delivery note issuing party is the brand warehouse and its object is model X, while the applicant is East China regional dealer A, so the delivery note is not approval evidence.
- For empty-result handover, input the explicit paper input []. Compare whether the downstream retrieval node is designed to handle an empty result. The observable result is that the downstream node returns no fabricated records and the gap is recorded as unsupported. The documents do not state that a retrieval under a fabricated rule always returns []; this item is a design check only and no test is claimed.
Libraries on different vector models cannot be associated together. Check identifiers first and exclude non-matching libraries; do not run a cross-model retrieval to compare missed recall. Image retrieval requires a corresponding image input and model capability, and reranking requires a model and must be enabled according to its settings. Optional paths shown in a general workflow diagram do not mean every request executes all of them.