What the documents look like
Returned-goods inspection handles reverse parcels and item grades. It does not handle outbound picking for new orders. The data sources are the WMS returns module, platform after-sales records, carrier return parcels and the inspection bench, updated per item and per day. The daily documents are the return inbound receipt, inspection photos, the grade determination table and the resale listing sheet. These materials determine whether a returned item can be resold, scrapped or moved into refund dispute handling. Operations handover concerns the authorization state of a given material, action or request at the current step.
Constraints at the workflow routing step
In FastGPT v4.17.2, workflow routing is implemented through the Form Input node and the User Selection node. Both are user-interaction nodes. When either node is triggered, the conversation enters an interactive state, the workflow state is recorded, and execution continues after the user completes the interaction. The Form Input node collects required information and passes the submitted values to later nodes. The User Selection node evaluates the user's choice and executes the corresponding "yes" branch. These two nodes collect values and route branches. Order writes, document backfill and external status synchronization require a separate business interface or a later process. Retrieval results and form submissions do not constitute authorization. A similarity score does not perform permission or entity isolation.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample: an after-sales warehouse inspector submits a return inbound receipt, number RT-2024-0871, item is a brand electric kettle, return quantity 2 units, arrival date 12 June 2024. The inspection photos show scratches on the housing. The grade determination table gives an initial judgment of grade B, resalable. The draft handover sentence under review is: "This return inbound receipt has completed inspection; approved for resale listing at grade B; please have the inventory administrator execute the listing." The available materials contain only the inspection photos and the grade determination table. There is no resale listing sheet and no inventory administrator signature record.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Hypothetical trial starting point for this page | Reason for the choice and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| Form Input required fields | Return inbound receipt number, item name, return quantity | Compare against whether the sample materials state these three items; record a gap when missing |
| User Selection branch options | Two options configured: "resale" and "scrap" | Compare against grade determination table values; the option is selectable only when the table explicitly states the matching grade |
| Interactive state recording | Node default interaction record enabled | Compare whether the conversation enters an interactive state after the node triggers and waits for submission |
| Output handoff target | Pass form-collected fields to the later decision node | Compare each later node input against the form output item by item |
| External action split | Resale listing sheet and inventory write handled by a separate interface | Check whether an independent listing sheet and write record exist; mark as pending implementation when absent |
| Retrieval scope check | Check materials within the target retrieval scope the operator may access | Check whether material identifiers match; record a gap when missing |
Three common errors
- Treating a form submission as completed authorization. In the sample, the inspector's form submission only means information collection finished. It does not mean the inventory administrator approved resale. Compare the draft sentence "approved for resale listing at grade B" against the available materials: the resale listing sheet and the signature record are absent, so the request remains pending verification.
- Treating the User Selection "yes" branch as a business approval. Branch execution only means the user made a choice. It does not mean approval was granted. Compare the branch execution record against the approval signature record; these are two different facts.
- Treating retrieval similarity as a permission filter. A similarity score does not exclude unrelated business records or unauthorized records. Compare the returned results against the access permission list and confirm whether any out-of-scope material appears.
How to verify the setup
- Input the draft sentence and the available material list from the sample. Compare whether the "resale listing sheet" and the "inventory administrator signature record" appear. When both are missing, the expected result is pending verification, and resale must not be judged as approved.
- Input the Form Input node's collected fields and the receiving fields of the later node. Compare whether the two match item by item. When they match, the expected result is correct handoff; when they do not, record the differing items.
- Input an explicit paper retrieval scope. Compare whether every material identifier in the returned results falls within the authorization list. When an identifier outside the list appears, the expected result is an out-of-scope risk that must be recorded and excluded. An empty result can be checked against an explicit paper input of [] for downstream design; this does not claim that a fictional rule retrieval necessarily returns [].