What the documents look like
Near-expiry markdown handling tracks the remaining sellable time of shelf stock. It does not process orders item by item through weighing and sorting. The daily materials are the near-expiry list, the markdown approval, the damage write-off form and the promotional price tag. These draw on POS stock age, store inspection, ERP inventory and quality inspection records. During shift handover the same batch can appear under different statuses recorded by different staff, so workflow routing has to connect three stages: identifying the near-expiry batch, approving the markdown, and isolating unsellable goods. Each stage needs its input material and its authorization state stated plainly.
The form input node and the user selection node both belong to the user interaction type. When either node triggers, the conversation enters an interaction state, the workflow state is recorded, and execution continues after the user finishes interacting. The form input node collects required information the user fills in and passes that information to later nodes after submission. The user selection node judges the user's choice and executes the "yes" branch. The interaction state is recorded by the node itself; no separate global state-recording switch is documented. Collected values must be passed explicitly to later retrieval, judgment or interface nodes, and output compared against input item by item. Order writes, document backfill and external status synchronization require a separate business interface or a later process. Retrieval and forms do not constitute authorization to execute.
Constraints at the workflow routing step
A hypothetical paper exercise sample is set out here for comparison only. The near-expiry list text reads: "Shift of 10 June 2025, banana batch B-0610, stock age remaining 1 day, inspection status pending markdown approval, requested markdown rate 30 percent off, applicant Zhang, approver Li has not signed." A draft sentence reads: "This batch's markdown application has been approved and can be sold at 30 percent off." The subject, object and status needed for judgment all sit in the same material, and the approver signature field is empty. The draft sentence is therefore not supported by the material.
Several boundaries follow. A form submission is collection of user-entered values, not completion of an approval. A user selection branch executes after the user makes a choice; branch execution is not business approval. Semantic recall and relevance scores do not perform permission or entity isolation, so retrieval is not authorization. Where the material states a pending status, that status remains pending; a pending request is not an approval. Where a signature field is empty, the authorization state is unverified rather than denied. Where only one side of a two-party record exists, the shared fact is not established. Missing evidence stays missing, and no automatic business action, error code or scheduled trigger is assumed.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Relation to these documents | How to check |
|---|---|---|
| Required fields on the form input node | Collects batch number, requested markdown rate and applicant | After submission, check whether later nodes receive these values |
| Branches on the user selection node | Approver choosing agree or reject routes to the matching branch | Verify branch connections one by one and confirm the "yes" branch executes |
| Interaction state record | Conversation enters interaction state when the node triggers | Observe whether the conversation enters interaction state; no separate global switch is set |
| Information passing path | Form values passed to later retrieval, judgment or interface nodes | Compare output against input item by item |
| Division of external operations | Order writes, document backfill, external status synchronization | Confirm a separate business interface or later process exists; a form does not replace authorization |
| Hypothetical exercise starting value | This paper exercise sets the markdown rate starting point at 30 percent off | Chosen only for paper comparison against the 30 percent off requested in the list text |
Three common errors
- Treating form submission as completed approval. The form input node collects information the user fills in. When the approver signature field is empty, the draft sentence "has been approved" lacks support. Check by entering the list text and the draft sentence, comparing whether the approver field is empty; if it is empty, the draft sentence does not hold.
- Treating the "yes" branch of the user selection node as automatic authorization. The node executes the matching branch after the user makes a choice, and branch execution is not a passed business approval. Check by entering the selection record and the approval material, comparing whether both refer to the same subject and the same period; if only a selection record exists with no signature, the authorization state remains unverified.
- Treating retrieval results as a permission filter. Semantic recall and relevance do not carry permission or entity isolation. Check by entering the batch records returned by retrieval and the authorization scope for the current shift, comparing whether batch number and authorized object match; if they do not match, record the gap and do not execute the later operation.
How to verify the setup
- Verification one: input the near-expiry list text from the hypothetical sample and the draft sentence "This batch's markdown application has been approved and can be sold at 30 percent off." Compare the approver signature field against the approval wording in the draft sentence. If the signature field is empty, the draft sentence is unsupported and should be recorded as pending verification. The expected observation is that when the approver field is empty, the draft sentence does not enter the execution branch.
- Verification two: input the user selection record from the hypothetical sample and the approval material. Compare whether the subject and period in the selection record match the signing subject and period in the approval material. If they differ, or the approval material is absent, the authorization state is unsupported. The expected observation is that with only one side of the material present, the system does not pass an execution instruction to the downstream interface node.
- Verification three: input the batch records returned by retrieval and the authorization scope for the current shift. Compare whether batch number, store identifier and authorized object match. If the retrieval result contains a batch outside the authorized scope, record the gap and exclude that record. The expected observation is that retrieval results do not automatically gain authorization, and identifiers must be checked manually before later nodes run.
These checks describe comparison steps and expected observations for a paper exercise. They do not report a completed test, an approval, a deployment or any business action.