What the documents look like
Creator sales campaigns depend on external creator fulfilment and commission settlement. The working documents are creator cooperation agreements, commission setting forms, sample dispatch forms and live-stream performance reports. In cross-border material and multilingual retrieval, these documents may exist in several language versions, so retrieval is organised by document type, language and business stage. Creator historical data and store transaction details arrive from channels such as Selected Alliance and Juliang Xingtu, with update frequency per session or weekly. Workflow routing needs to limit the retrieval scope to the material set belonging to the current campaign.
Two or three industry facts shape this task directly. The campaign is fulfilled by an external creator, so the agreement and the commission setting form are separate records that can disagree. The commission setting form may be revised after the agreement is drafted. The sample dispatch form records physical dispatch, and its signature status is a distinct field from dispatch itself.
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 the required information the user fills in and passes it to later nodes. The user selection node is also a user interaction node. It enters the same interaction state and records workflow state. When the user makes a choice, the node judges the selection and executes the corresponding branch.
Retrieval results do not constitute authorisation. Values collected by a form do not mean business approval is complete. Commission settlement, sample signature confirmation and similar business actions need a separate interface or a later process. Workflow routing can complete information collection and branch judgement only.
Hypothetical exercise sample: a brand business staff member submits material to be checked before a cross-border creator campaign. The source text reads: "Creator cooperation agreement (English version) clause 3: the commission rate is 15% of sales, and the settlement period is 30 days after the live stream ends; the commission setting form shows a commission rate of 12% for the same campaign; the sample dispatch form records 2 samples dispatched, and the signature status is not stated." The draft sentence is: "This campaign settles commission at 15%, and the samples have been signed for." The question is whether the draft sentence is consistent with the material.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Setting or check content | Relation to this page's documents |
|---|---|---|
| Form input node | Enters interaction state on trigger, collects required information, passes it to later nodes | Collects campaign identifier, language and material scope |
| User selection node | Executes the corresponding branch after the user makes a choice | Confirms retrieval scope or document type |
| Retrieval scope limitation | Limited to the document set belonging to the current campaign | Prevents material from other campaigns entering the set |
| Output handover | Passes collected information explicitly to later retrieval or judgement nodes | Compares output against input item by item |
| Business action division | Commission settlement and signature confirmation connect to a separate interface or later process | Retrieval and forms do not execute authorisation |
| Empty-result handover | Checks downstream design against a paper input of [] | Does not claim a fabricated rule always returns empty |
Three common errors
- Treating the commission rate collected by a form as the settlement basis. The form input node only collects information the user fills in. Commission settlement requires item-by-item comparison against the commission setting form and the cooperation agreement. A submitted form does not mean the settlement rate is confirmed.
- Treating a retrieval hit as authorisation. A retrieval result reflects that material exists. It does not show that the cooperation agreement was signed or that the commission setting was approved. A pending review state does not show that operation permission is absent. Signing, cooperation being reached and a contract taking effect are three distinct facts.
- Treating a user selection branch as a completed business action. The user selection node only judges the choice and executes a branch. Sample signature confirmation and commission settlement need a separate interface or later process. Branch execution does not equal a completed business action.
How to verify the setup
- Input the hypothetical sample source text above and the draft sentence. Compare the 15% commission rate in clause 3 of the cooperation agreement with the 12% in the commission setting form. When the same field carries mutually exclusive values, judge it contradictory, and the draft sentence "settles commission at 15%" is not supported.
- Input the sample dispatch form source text. Compare the signature status field. The source text does not state signature status, so the draft sentence "the samples have been signed for" is not supported. Record the evidence gap and do not supply a signature record.
- Input a paper empty result of []. Check whether the downstream node handles it on the empty-result branch. Observe whether downstream continues retrieval or moves to manual checking. Do not claim that a fabricated rule always returns empty.