What the documents look like
Wholesale market stall trading is more fragmented than regional distributor replenishment. On-site bargaining and shipping arrangements set the daily rhythm, and the paperwork reflects separate stages of goods and payment facts. A purchase note, a handwritten sales slip, a stall lease contract and a payment receipt each record a different part of the transaction, and they do not share one authorizing subject. A handwritten sales slip can show that a particular lot of goods was billed. A stall lease contract can show the arrangement for using a stall during a stated period. A payment receipt can show that a particular sum was received. The parties, periods and fields of these materials are independent, so workflow routing must carry forward the subject, object, status and effective scope of each document separately. The existence of one document does not support a fact recorded in another.
Data updates daily and per order. That frequency does not change the routing behavior described here, so no batch synchronization, full synchronization, real-time trigger or transaction-triggered mechanism follows from it.
Constraints at the workflow routing step
The Form Input node and the User Selection node are both user interaction nodes. When either node is triggered, the conversation enters an interaction state, the workflow state is recorded, and execution continues downward after the user completes the interaction. The Form Input node collects required information and passes it to subsequent nodes. The User Selection node judges the user's choice and executes the corresponding branch. These two node behaviors are collection and branching. They do not verify the truth of any material and they do not grant operational permission. Order writes, document backfill and external status synchronization require a separate business interface or a later process. Retrieval and forms do not carry authorization or execution.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample. The following is paper-check material and does not correspond to any real subject or real transaction. Material text one: "The stall lease contract states that the lessor is Party A market management, the lessee is Party B merchant, the stall number is A-17, and the lease period runs from March 1, 2025 to February 28, 2026." Material text two: "The handwritten sales slip states that the issuing party is Party B merchant, the purchasing party is Party C purchaser, the goods are 20 boxes of dried chili, the issue date is June 10, 2025, and a payment receipt is attached separately." Draft sentence to be assessed: "Party B merchant sold 20 boxes of dried chili to Party C purchaser at stall A-17 on June 10, 2025, and this transaction has been reviewed and approved by market management." Check points: the contract parties are Party A and Party B; the sales slip parties are Party B and Party C; the draft sentence adds the status "reviewed and approved by market management," and the material texts do not record that approval fact. The contract period covers June 10, 2025, but the contract only shows the stall use arrangement and does not show the approval status of any individual sale.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Relevant setting or check on this page | Correspondence with the sample |
|---|---|---|
| Form Input node | Enters interaction state when triggered; collects required information | Collects the subject, object and date fields involved in the draft sentence |
| User Selection node | Executes the corresponding branch after the user makes a choice | Sets a branch check for "whether the approval status is recorded" |
| Interaction state check | Recording state is behavior of an interaction node | Checks whether the sample material enters interaction waiting |
| Output handoff check | Passes collected information to subsequent nodes | Compares contract, sales slip and receipt fields against the draft sentence |
| External operation division | Order writes, document backfill and external synchronization connect to separate interfaces | The approved status requires a separate business interface to confirm |
Hypothetical starting value for this exercise: mark the "approved" field in the draft sentence as pending verification, because the material texts do not record that status. The comparison objects are the fields recorded in the contract text and the sales slip text. A retrieval similarity score is not used as the basis for judgment.
Three common errors
- Treating a retrieval result as an authorization basis. If a similarity score is used to judge whether Party B merchant has the right to sell at stall A-17, the input is a retrieved contract fragment, the comparison object should be the contract subject and the sales slip subject, and the observable result is whether the two are the same. Retrieval does not carry permission or entity isolation, and a similarity score is not a permission filter condition.
- Treating form collection as business verification. The Form Input node collects required information and passes it to subsequent nodes; it does not perform review. If the draft sentence writes "approved," the input is the submitted form value, the comparison object is whether the material texts record that status, and the observable result is whether the source texts contain a corresponding field.
- Treating a pending-review status as missing operational permission. If the sample shows the wording "pending market management review," that status only indicates that review is not yet complete; it does not indicate that Party B merchant lacks the right to use the stall. The input is that status text, the comparison object is whether the contract records a permission restriction clause, and the observable result is whether the contract text contains such a clause.
How to verify the setup
- Using sample material text one and text two, input the draft sentence, compare the subject, object and date recorded in the draft sentence against the corresponding fields in the two source texts, and observe the result. When the subjects are Party B and Party C, the object is 20 boxes of dried chili, and the date is June 10, 2025, the goods and date fields are supported. The field "reviewed and approved by market management" is not recorded in the source texts and is logged as an evidence gap.
- Using sample material text one, input the question "is Party B merchant's sale at stall A-17 within the lease period," compare the contract period March 1, 2025 to February 28, 2026 against the sale date June 10, 2025, and observe the result. The sale date falls within the contract period, so the stall use arrangement is supported. That support does not extend to approval status or payment settlement status.
- Using an empty-result handoff check, input an explicit paper empty array [], compare whether the downstream node designs a branch for empty input, and observe the result. The condition is met when the downstream node gives an explicit handoff path for empty input. A fabricated rule that retrieval must return an empty array is not used as a premise. Libraries across different vector models cannot be associated together; check the identifier first, exclude those that do not match, and record the actual observation. Cross-model retrieval is not performed to compare missed recall.