Explain subcontract receipts whose output measure differs from input

Setup requirements

1. Require an explicit consumption measurement or owner-approved conversion basis; output quantity alone does not establish consumption.

2. Raw input balance and transformed-output yield are separate tests. No universal mass/length conservation rule is assumed.

3. The process owner reviews material quality, allowable yield and any physical discrepancy; the model cannot approve the receipt.

4. Agree this bounded synthetic scope and confirm a real unresolved need before any implementation pilot. The written design does not authorize executing it.

Inputs and access

1. Name

   subcontract_run.json

   Source or owner

   Production owner

   Scope

   Synthetic run ID, supplied raw item/lot, quantities, units and transfer IDs.

   Sensitivity

   Synthetic fixture only. A real-data pilot requires a separate minimized scope and approved handling.

   Permission needed

   Owner approval of exact data, processing environment, retention and recipients before a pilot. No pilot is authorized by this plan.

2. Name

   vendor_measurement_statement.txt

   Source or owner

   Buyer

   Scope

   Synthetic consumed-input, returned-raw, scrap and finished-output measurements with timestamps and methods.

   Sensitivity

   Synthetic fixture only. A real-data pilot requires a separate minimized scope and approved handling.

   Permission needed

   Owner approval of exact data, processing environment, retention and recipients before a pilot. No pilot is authorized by this plan.

3. Name

   receipt_draft.json

   Source or owner

   Receiving owner

   Scope

   Synthetic output item, measured quantity and any mapped consumed-input field.

   Sensitivity

   Synthetic fixture only. A real-data pilot requires a separate minimized scope and approved handling.

   Permission needed

   Owner approval of exact data, processing environment, retention and recipients before a pilot. No pilot is authorized by this plan.

4. Name

   yield_rules.json

   Source or owner

   Process owner

   Scope

   Approved input/output measurement definitions, expected ranges, tolerances and explicitly comparable units.

   Sensitivity

   Synthetic fixture only. A real-data pilot requires a separate minimized scope and approved handling.

   Permission needed

   Owner approval of exact data, processing environment, retention and recipients before a pilot. No pilot is authorized by this plan.

Human approval boundaries

1. Before a pilot, the accountable owner approves exact synthetic/minimized copies, processing environment, retention and allowed recipients.

2. Owner validates identity mappings, authority, status definitions and all unresolved evidence.

3. Any source mutation, account access, upload, external communication, commercial commitment, payment or changed permission requires separate appropriate authorization.

The problem

A process can change a material’s measured length or weight. A receipt that substitutes output quantity for consumed input can look impossible even when the physical transformation is plausible.

Suggested task

Keep raw input consumption and processed output measurements separate, and explain exceptions against owner-supplied yield rules.

What you could produce

A run-level input disposition and output-yield review with unresolved measurements, rather than a changed BOM or receipt.

Why an agent / simpler alternative

An agent may extract measurement context from vendor notes and distinguish semantic quantity types. Balances and ratios are deterministic. A correctly configured subcontracting system or fixed-schema measurement sheet is preferable when those distinctions are already explicit.

When this work comes up

Role

Subcontract production coordinator

Trigger

A subcontract receipt quantity fails a supplied-material check or differs from the vendor’s consumption statement.

Human approval

Owner reviews scope, rules, identities and findings; operating decisions remain separately authorized.

Finished output

A run-level input disposition and output-yield review with unresolved measurements, rather than a changed BOM or receipt.

Proposed evaluation scope — no pilot authorized

Scope

At most 10 synthetic runs; each pilot run has one input material and one output material on an owner-defined measurement basis.

Limit origin

Original editorial evaluation bound, not a verified tool limit.

Overflow action

Stop and request owner-approved partitioning; no silent truncation.

Pilot authorized

No

Evidence boundary

Source facts describe human friction; O*NET describes duties; shared official documentation supports file primitives. The six-step workflow, safeguards, numerical fixture and outputs are original proposed designs.

Proposed steps

1. 1

   Identify the run, input lots, measurement bases and authoritative vendor statement.

   Output: Run measurement manifest.

   Expected output: Run measurement manifest.

   Checkpoint: Retain source IDs/spans and explicit unknown states. No source writes or external action.

   Approval gate: Owner approves exact inputs and rule scope before any pilot.

2. 2

   Extract supplied, consumed, unprocessed return, scrap and output observations as distinct typed events with citations.

   Output: Typed quantity ledger.

   Expected output: Typed quantity ledger.

   Checkpoint: Retain source IDs/spans and explicit unknown states. No source writes or external action.

   Approval gate: Owner resolves ambiguous meaning, identity or authority before affected rows advance.

3. 3

   Check raw material disposition using only comparable input units and explicit owner rules; show unexplained input balance.

   Output: Raw-input balance.

   Expected output: Raw-input balance.

   Checkpoint: Retain source IDs/spans and explicit unknown states. No source writes or external action.

   Approval gate: Owner resolves ambiguous meaning, identity or authority before affected rows advance.

4. 4

   Compare output with the measured consumed input under the supplied process-specific yield range; show ratio and missing-basis flags.

   Output: Output-yield exceptions.

   Expected output: Output-yield exceptions.

   Checkpoint: Retain source IDs/spans and explicit unknown states. No source writes or external action.

   Approval gate: Owner resolves ambiguous meaning, identity or authority before affected rows advance.

5. 5

   Compare the draft receipt’s consumption mapping with the measured ledger and identify where output has been substituted for input.

   Output: Mapping-error review.

   Expected output: Mapping-error review.

   Checkpoint: Retain source IDs/spans and explicit unknown states. No source writes or external action.

   Approval gate: Owner reviews draft findings; no operational action authorized.

6. 6

   Prepare evidence, formulas and questions for production and receiving; do not alter tolerances, BOM, receipt or inventory.

   Output: Review-only receipt explanation.

   Expected output: Review-only receipt explanation.

   Checkpoint: Retain source IDs/spans and explicit unknown states. No source writes or external action.

   Approval gate: Owner accepts the review artifact; any live change or communication needs separate approval.

Original starter prompt — proposed

Origin

editorial_proposal

Execution authorized

No

Text

Using only {approved_synthetic_inputs} and {owner_rules}, Keep raw input consumption and processed output measurements separate, and explain exceptions against owner-supplied yield rules. Follow the six-step design. Preserve exact identities, source citations and uncertainty; make calculations inspectable. Write only separate review drafts to {approved_output_folder}. Do not guess missing facts, alter sources, access accounts, send, upload, buy, post, settle, make personnel decisions or claim the fixture passed.

Expected output schema — proposed

Primary key

1. run_id

2. input_lot_id

3. output_line_id

4. measurement_basis_id

Columns

1. supplied_input

2. consumed_input

3. returned_raw

4. input_scrap

5. unexplained_input

6. measured_output

7. output_per_consumed_input

8. owner_yield_range

9. draft_consumption

10. state

11. source_spans

Record status

draft_review_only

Common provenance columns

1. input_snapshot_id

2. rule_version

3. source_document_id

4. source_row_or_span

5. reviewer_decision

Unknown value policy

Unknown numeric values remain null, never zero. Preserve raw rows and typed relation/allocation IDs; unresolved rows do not silently enter approved totals.

Synthetic output illustration — not an executed result

Label

Synthetic authored example, not observed output

Synthetic

Yes

Executed

No

Input

Supplied

100

Consumed

98

Raw return

2

Output

101

Draft consumption

101

Expected

Unexplained input

0

Yield ratio

101/98

Draft consumption difference

3

Receipt approved

No

Limits

1. Original proposed and untested design; no source documents this complete agent workflow.

2. A reported problem is not proof of prevalence, willingness to pay, harm magnitude or current demand.

3. Historical product reports require current-installation checks; a current capability document only establishes general primitives.

4. Native reports or a deterministic script may be simpler. Exports, identity mappings, context size, privacy controls and actual tool compatibility remain untested.

5. Numerical fixtures are synthetic and have not been executed. Owner review is necessary; no time saving, cost saving or revenue outcome is asserted.

Candidate platforms — compatibility untested

1. Name

   ChatGPT Work

   Required capabilities

   1. Assess this plan’s input, operation and output requirements before selecting an account.

   Capability source urls

   1. https://learn.chatgpt.com/docs/get-started-with-work

   Selection basis

   Editorial candidate only. Shared source facts are general primitives; this plan remains unexecuted.

   Workflow compatibility

   BotCurrent has not tested this workflow.

2. Name

   Claude

   Required capabilities

   1. Assess this plan’s input, operation and output requirements before selecting an account.

   Capability source urls

   1. https://support.claude.com/en/articles/16761823-claude-cowork-and-chat-are-one-claude

   Selection basis

   Editorial candidate only. Shared source facts are general primitives; this plan remains unexecuted.

   Workflow compatibility

   BotCurrent has not tested this workflow.

Failure modes

1. Processed output length is treated as additional raw consumption.

2. Measurements with different moisture, unit or calibration bases are combined.

3. A plausible ratio is mistaken for quality acceptance or inventory authorization.

Recovery and troubleshooting

1. Signal

   Processed output length is treated as additional raw consumption.

   Recovery

   Restore separate input and output event types and require actual consumption evidence.

   Resume condition

   The accountable owner supplies the missing authoritative evidence or approved interpretation; otherwise keep the affected result unresolved.

2. Signal

   Measurements with different moisture, unit or calibration bases are combined.

   Recovery

   Hold comparison until the process owner supplies comparable measurements or an explicit conversion.

   Resume condition

   The accountable owner supplies the missing authoritative evidence or approved interpretation; otherwise keep the affected result unresolved.

3. Signal

   A plausible ratio is mistaken for quality acceptance or inventory authorization.

   Recovery

   Keep quality and receiving decisions blank and route the explanatory packet to the owner.

   Resume condition

   The accountable owner supplies the missing authoritative evidence or approved interpretation; otherwise keep the affected result unresolved.

Unexecuted validation plan

Sample setup

Run R1 receives 100 metres of raw material; statement records 98 consumed and 2 returned raw. Output is 101 metres. Owner-approved output/input range is 1.00–1.04 on the same measurement basis. Receipt draft incorrectly uses 101 as consumed input. R2 has output but no consumption observation; R3 mixes kilograms and metres without conversion.

Acceptance checks

1. R1 raw input reconciles 100=98+2; transformed output is not added to that input balance.

2. R1 ratio 101/98 is approximately 1.030612 and is within the supplied range; this is an arithmetic finding, not process approval.

3. The draft consumption differs by 3 metres from measured consumption and is flagged.

4. R2 consumption and ratio remain unknown; R3 is held for incompatible units.

5. No tolerance increase, stock adjustment or technical process recommendation is made.

6. Every conclusion traces to approved source rows or an explicitly labelled owner rule; rerunning the same frozen input must not change identities or totals.

7. All source copies remain unchanged. Any duplicate, missing key, stale snapshot or conflicting authority is held visibly.

Stop conditions

1. Input scope, required identity or calculation policy is missing.

2. Unexpected real sensitive/personal data is supplied before handling approval.

3. The requested output would require live account access, external upload/send, accounting posting, purchase, access change or irreversible action.

Executed

No

Fixture status

Designed only; no acceptance fixture or workflow executed.

Costs and effort — unknown or hypothetical

Status

unknown_or_estimate

Currency

Not specified.

Items

1. Plan access, model usage, tool runtime and storage costs unknown.

2. Export preparation, evidence cleanup, review and correction effort unmeasured.

3. No native integration, paid service, new account or software installation assumed.

4. Case-specific effort is unknown: source extraction, identity repair, owner-rule preparation, fixture design and review may dominate model cost.

Caveat

No measured time saving, current demand, ROI or price claim. Compare the simpler remedy first.

Canadian adaptation — proposed

Verify local privacy and organizational record-handling requirements before any real-data pilot; preserve original currency, business calendars and time zones. No Canadian deployment or compliance claim.