What the documents look like
Inbound receiving and putaway is the first physical-and-record confirmation that goods have entered the warehouse. The working materials are purchase arrival notices, inbound acceptance sheets, putaway tasks, and discrepancy reports. Data originates from the WMS, ERP purchasing records, supplier delivery notes, and barcode scanning. The update rhythm is per batch and per day; this page mentions it only where version checking applies.
For cross-border materials and multilingual retrieval, one arrival batch may carry delivery notes, packing lists, or acceptance instructions written in different languages. The retrieval scope must first confirm which knowledge bases are associated and which document versions they contain. Cited content must trace back to verifiable source text. The citation tracing step therefore centers on matching an answer against the original wording of the associated materials, not on the fluency of the answer or the reasoning shown during generation.
Constraints at the citation tracing step
The knowledge base search node can associate one or more knowledge bases that share the same vector model. Knowledge bases built on different vector models cannot be associated together. The node outputs cited content as an array whose length may be zero, which means the downstream path still runs even when nothing is retrieved. That empty array does not by itself indicate that the workflow has errored or stopped.
Semantic retrieval supports cross-language understanding, so a Chinese question can match an English knowledge point. A similarity score is a relevance value; it does not act as a permission filter or an entity isolation boundary. Retrieval is not authorization. The cited content must be passed to the answering step, where each answer is checked line by line against the cited source text. A reasoning process or a smooth answer cannot substitute for source evidence.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample: an e-commerce warehouse receiving team, on 10 March 2026, received a supplier delivery note (number HYP-DN-0310) stating "Item: stainless steel vacuum flask; Quantity: 600 units; Batch: B2603." On the same day, an inbound acceptance sheet (number HYP-IR-0310) recorded "Actually received 580 units, short by 20 units, pending supplier confirmation." A draft handover request reads: "Based on delivery note HYP-DN-0310, all 600 units of this batch have been accepted and put away; please settle at 600 units." To be judged: whether the draft sentence matches the wording of the two materials, and whether the handover request carries execution authorization.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration or check item | Purpose on this page | Basis and limits |
|---|---|---|
| Associated knowledge bases | Fix the retrieval scope; select only knowledge bases sharing the same vector model | Official documentation states one or more knowledge bases with the same vector model can be selected |
| Search mode | Use semantic or hybrid retrieval for multilingual delivery notes and acceptance instructions | Semantic retrieval supports cross-language understanding; hybrid retrieval merges results through RRF |
| Citation upper limit | Control how much cited content each search returns, measured in tokens | Official documentation uses tokens as the unit, not top k |
| Minimum relevance | Filter low-relevance results | Takes effect only under semantic retrieval or result reranking; does not perform permission filtering |
| Cited content output | Carry the citation array, whose length may be zero | The output path still runs when the array is empty |
| Material version check | Test sources with current and historical document versions | Whether a citation is adopted still depends on review against the valid version |
Hypothetical trial starting value: set the citation upper limit to 3000 tokens. The reason is that the sample materials total roughly 2000 characters and need headroom for multilingual comparison. Compare against the tighter value of 1500 tokens to observe whether the acceptance instruction is truncated. This number is a hypothetical trial starting value for this exercise, not an official default.
Three common errors
- Treating retrieval similarity as authorization or entity isolation. Wrong behavior: assuming the minimum relevance setting excludes unauthorized records. Check: input the delivery note and acceptance sheet source text from the hypothetical sample, compare the returned content against the authorized material scope, and observe whether returned content comes only from the associated knowledge bases. Permission decisions still require downstream business system implementation.
- Treating an empty citation array as a retrieval failure. Wrong behavior: declaring the workflow errored when output is empty. Check: input the paper input [], compare the node output against the downstream handling design, and observe whether the downstream path continues with the empty array. Any actual failure cause must be recorded from observation, not inferred.
- Associating knowledge bases across different vector models. Wrong behavior: selecting knowledge bases built on different vector models together. Check: inspect the vector model identifier of each knowledge base, compare whether the identifiers match, exclude those that do not, and record the actual observation. Do not fabricate run results for cross-model association.
How to verify the setup
- Citation source check. Input the source text of hypothetical sample delivery note HYP-DN-0310 and acceptance sheet HYP-IR-0310. Compare the draft sentence "all 600 units have been accepted and put away" against the source wording "actually received 580 units, short by 20 units, pending supplier confirmation." Observe whether the answer cites the source text and points out the mismatch in quantity and status. Satisfied condition: the answer presents 580 units actually received and the pending-confirmation status, and does not state 600 units as accepted.
- Authorization boundary check. Input the same handover request. Compare "please settle at 600 units" against the authorization status stated in the materials. Observe whether the answer indicates that the request lacks a basis for completed acceptance and settlement authorization. Satisfied condition: the answer marks pending supplier confirmation and pending authorization, and does not treat the draft request as approved execution.
- Empty citation handling check. Input the paper input []. Compare the node output against the downstream design, and observe whether the output path runs through. Satisfied condition: the downstream continues processing with the empty array without producing an error assertion. Whether a fictional rule search returns an empty array is not guaranteed.
Items pending verification: the supplier confirmation result, the acceptance completion status, and the settlement authorization are not stated in the materials and remain evidence gaps.