What the documents look like
Fruit-store procurement centers on four document types: purchase orders, receiving and inspection sheets, pesticide-residue test reports, and shrinkage records. In the cross-border materials and multilingual retrieval task, one shipment may carry a product name, grade, origin, and test conclusion written in different languages across different files. Inquiry and price comparison, along with grade acceptance at receiving, both begin by locating the matching material.
Each document type has a distinct subject, object, and field set. A purchase order records ordered quantity and agreed grade. A receiving sheet records the actual arrival state. A pesticide-residue test report records a test conclusion. A shrinkage record records a later handling result. Retrieval work compares these field by field; one document does not substitute for another.
Two industry facts shape this page. First, fruit procurement depends on wholesale-market conditions and grade-based acceptance more than on a headquarters standard meal plan, so grade and origin fields carry decision weight. Second, documents update daily or per batch, which means a retrieval step and a form step operate on a specific shipment rather than on a standing catalog.
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 execution continues after the user completes the interaction. The node collects the required information the user fills in and passes it to later nodes. The user selection node is also a user-interaction node. When the user makes a choice, the node evaluates that choice and executes the corresponding "yes" branch. The interaction state is recorded by these nodes; no separate global state switch is documented.
Collected information must be passed explicitly to a later retrieval, judgment, or interface node, and output is compared item by item against input. Order writing, document backfill, and external status synchronization require a separate business interface or a later flow. Retrieval and forms do not constitute authorization to execute.
Libraries built on different vector models cannot be associated together. Check the identifier first and exclude non-matching libraries. An empty-result handoff can be checked with a clearly stated paper input against the downstream design. Image retrieval requires a corresponding image input and model capability. Reranking requires a model and must be enabled according to its setting. RRF is a hybrid-result fusion process; it is not documented as a switch.
Hypothetical drill sample. A purchase order reads: "On 10 March 2026, a store ordered 80 boxes of Red Fuji apples from a wholesale stall, grade one, origin a named county, with a pesticide-residue test report required to accompany the goods." A receiving sheet reads: "On 12 March 2026, 80 boxes of Red Fuji apples arrived, sampled grade one, pesticide-residue test report submitted with the goods, report number missing." A draft sentence under review reads: "This batch of Red Fuji apples has completed receiving inspection and the pesticide-residue test report is complete." The subject, object, and dates in the draft match the two materials, but the receiving sheet states the report number is missing, so the word "complete" in the draft does not match the recorded field.
Configuration and implementation checks
The table below covers only settings or implementation checks relevant to this feature and this task. Numeric values are starting points for this hypothetical drill, with the reason for the choice and the comparison target stated.
| Configuration item | Hypothetical starting point or implementation check | Reason and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| Required fields on the form input node | Purchase order number, arrival date, product name, grade | Aligns with the sample material fields; a missing field leaves the interaction state waiting for completion |
| User selection node branch | Whether a pesticide-residue test report was submitted with the goods | Set the branch against the sample states "submitted with the goods" and "report number missing"; verify each connection |
| Information handoff target | Retrieval node and judgment node | Pass collected fields to later nodes; compare output against input item by item |
| Cross-library association check | Check the vector model identifier first | Exclude libraries whose identifiers do not match; do not run a cross-model retrieval comparison |
| Empty-result handoff | Paper input [] checked against the downstream design | Observe whether the downstream treats it as empty input; no claim that retrieval always returns [] |
| External operation split | Order writing and document backfill connect to a separate interface | Forms and retrieval do not perform writing or synchronization; check whether a later flow exists |
Three common errors
- Treating a retrieval hit as authorization to execute. Retrieval returns materials. Order writing and document backfill require a separate business interface or a later flow. A retrieval result is not an approval or an execution basis.
- Treating a pending-review state as a missing operation permission. In the sample, the receiving sheet states the report number is missing. That is an unsupported or pending-verification point. It does not establish that the batch was rejected or that the records conflict.
- Forcing an association across libraries on different vector models. Libraries on different vector models cannot be associated together. Check the identifier first and exclude non-matching libraries. Do not invent an outcome of the association.
How to verify the setup
- Input the sample purchase order and receiving sheet text. Compare the draft sentence "This batch of Red Fuji apples has completed receiving inspection and the pesticide-residue test report is complete" against the receiving sheet field "report number missing." If the word "complete" in the draft does not match the recorded field, the draft sentence is unsupported, and the evidence gap is retained. If the draft had instead stated that the report was submitted with the goods while the report number remains missing, that wording would match the recorded field.
- Input the sample selection item "whether a pesticide-residue test report was submitted with the goods." Compare the user selection node branch connection against the sample state "submitted with the goods." If the corresponding "yes" branch executes after the selection and the later node receives that field, the condition is met. If the branch is not connected or the field is not passed, record the gap.
- Input the paper empty result []. Compare the downstream retrieval and judgment node handoff design. If the downstream treats it as empty input and makes no claim that retrieval always returns [], the condition is met. If the downstream treats the empty input as a hit or as authorization, record the failing branch.
Across all three checks, the comparison holds only when the subject, period, and field match. A field is contradictory only when the same field carries explicitly mutually exclusive values. A field that is not stated, or where only a related-stage record exists, is unsupported or pending verification. A pending review does not establish a missing operation permission. Signing, reaching cooperation, and contract effectiveness are three separate facts. A quotation validity period does not indicate a supply period. Where the material needed for a check is absent from the accessible target retrieval scope or from a clear manual input, record the gap rather than supplying an authorization or effectiveness clause to reach a definite answer.