# Automated Scoping Agent decision sheet

Worked example companion. Fictional scenario; no measured results.

The proposal should preserve the reasoning behind the price, not just present a confident-looking total.

## How to use this sheet

Replace the example rules with your own. Keep each acceptance decision linked to its owner and evidence. Use the blank CSV to record your actual process; the example CSV contains teaching material.

| Situation to test | Expected behavior | Review and ownership |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Unclear requirement | Open question in the scope | Reviewer resolves before approval |
| Scope changes | New estimate version | Commercial owner reviews the revision |
| Partial submission | Retry only the missing step | Operations verifies output identities |

## Workflow

1. **Gather materials** (Requester): Capture requirements and unresolved questions.
2. **Structure scope** (Scope reviewer): Separate deliverables, assumptions and exclusions.
3. **Review estimate** (Commercial owner): Apply pricing rules to the agreed work.
4. **Prepare handoff** (Sales operations): Use the approved version across outputs.

Exception: Incomplete requirements pause approval. Partial downstream failures resume from the recorded submission rather than duplicating the proposal or opportunity.

## Measurement

Compare preparation time for comparable scopes and count revisions caused by missing requirements. Record duplicate or incomplete handoffs during a pilot. No time savings or pricing accuracy are claimed.

## Limitations

- This worked example is a proposed design, not access to a production application.
- Implementation depends on source data, access rules, and policies agreed with the responsible team.

Source page: https://www.opsautomators.com/work/scope-to-quote
Prepared September 16, 2026.