Workflow template for operations and process improvement
Matter coverage plan for absences
When leave or a staffing change takes someone away from active matters, the practice manager gets a draft coverage plan: a proposed cover for each matter, the attorney-confirmed dates in the absence, the access each cover needs and every handoff that is blocked. The practice lead and responsible attorneys decide.
This workflow template prepares legal work for a lawyer to review. It gives no legal advice and has not been reviewed by a lawyer. A lawyer decides and signs.
Listed under
Add it to a workflow in the Fully Powered Planner, beside the teams and roles that will run it. Book a fit call
The outcome
The aim is that no matter goes dark because its lawyer is on leave. Before the absence starts, the practice lead holds one page that answers the questions that usually surface too late: who picks up each matter, what is already booked while the person is away, whether the cover can even open the file, and which handoffs the firm's own records block, and why.
Every proposed cover has passed the same four checks, in the same order, every time: not away themselves; named with that matter by no row of the conflicts team's screen list (a row the plan cannot read counts against everyone it might name); holding every qualification the practice lead requires for it; and inside the cover limit the practice lead set. Where nobody passes, the plan says so plainly and shows why, so the practice lead decides with the facts in front of them instead of discovering a barrier the week of a hearing.
This is preparation, and it stays preparation. It gives no legal advice. It decides nothing about legal meaning, merit, validity, privilege, conflicts or deadlines, and clears no one. It sends, files, signs and calendars nothing. It reads the screen list as supplied, and it never says that a plan, a cover or a check is complete or safe to rely on; asked for a verdict, it names the lawyer who decides and points to the line of the plan set out for them. Every date in the plan is copied from dates an attorney has already confirmed; it counts, moves and suggests none. It changes no assignment or access, and contacts no client. It writes no email, letter or notice for anyone, not even as a draft for a lawyer to edit. A case or rule cited inside one of the files is listed for a lawyer to verify and never applied. The plan is headed as a draft for the practice lead by name, with a line for each point a lawyer must confirm, including the conflict check for every person proposed to cover a matter.
Who starts the work, and when
The practice manager starts it once leave is approved, or once the practice lead confirms a staffing change, and ideally a week or more before the absence begins. It can be run again whenever the leave dates, the team or the screen list change.
The practice lead, a lawyer, agrees or changes each proposed cover and decides every blocked handoff. If no practice lead is named, or the one named is the person away or is not recorded as a lawyer, nothing is prepared until the firm names the lawyer who decides. The responsible attorney on each matter confirms that the commitments list is complete and its dates right, the conflict check for anyone joining the matter, what the cover may do on the matter, and the access the cover needs. Where the responsible attorney is the person who is away, the practice lead, or a lawyer the firm names, confirms in their place. Every confirming lawyer must be recorded in the staff list as a lawyer, or that matter's confirm lines are addressed to no one until the firm names one. The plan flags any of these lawyers whose own leave falls in the absence, or whom the screen list names on a matter they decide or confirm. Matter-file access is decided by the person the firm names, and only after the confirming lawyer has confirmed the conflict check and scope and the practice lead has agreed the cover.
It is not for leave that is only requested, for telling a client who is covering their matter or writing to a court or anyone else about the absence, for deciding whether anyone has a conflict, or for the handover when someone leaves the firm.
What they supply
- The request: who is away, today's date, the practice lead's name, the staff roles in the firm that only lawyers hold, and who confirms when the responsible attorney is the one away.
- The leave record: approved and requested leave for everyone in the team.
- Three exports from the case system or practice records: the matter list, who holds which role on each matter with its named backup, and the staff list with each person's qualifications and cover limit.
- The role requirements file, dated and approved by the practice lead: which staff roles may cover each matter role, and any qualification a particular matter needs in its cover.
- The attorney-confirmed dates for each matter.
- The screen list from the conflicts team, dated: who is recorded as screened from, or conflicted on, which matter.
- The access record, if the firm keeps one: who can open each matter file.
The workflow template states the column headers it expects in each export. If a header does not match, it stops and asks rather than guessing. It works from these files alone and needs no connection to the firm's systems and no sign-in details.
What comes out
- A short note to the practice manager: what stopped, what is blocked, which dates to chase, which deciding lawyers are themselves away during the absence or named on the screen list for a matter they decide, and anything in the files that was not acted on, including any case cited in a file, listed for a lawyer to verify.
- The draft plan, marked as a draft for the practice lead by name, with the cover period and the window for commitments worked out and shown.
- Matters affected, in the order their first confirmed commitment falls, plus matters not planned and any matter where the absent person was the named backup, with its commitments in the window.
- Proposed cover for each role, with which step of the order found the person and each of the four checks.
- Commitments in the absence, copied word for word with who confirmed each and when; unconfirmed ones are marked, and ones without a date are listed as such.
- Access needed, for the person who decides access, after the lawyers' lines that come first.
- Blocked handoffs, with every person tested, every reason and the commitments left without cover, marked as above.
- Capacity, and anything in the files that could not be read.
- A confirm list: one line for the practice lead per cover and per blocked handoff, and a block for each confirming lawyer per matter, with a conflict check line for every proposed cover.
- A check block that adds the dates and the screen list back to their files row by row and says nothing was changed.
An invented example
Illustrative example with invented data. The firm, its people, its clients, its matters, the place called Jurisdiction K and every file below are invented. People are shown by role and letter. The firm's disputes team has six lawyers and two paralegals. Attorney B, a senior associate, has approved leave from Monday 23 November to Friday 11 December 2026, and the practice manager prepares the plan on Wednesday 11 November. The role requirements file and the screen list are one invented firm's own records, not anyone's real rules.
The practice manager's inputs come first, in full, then what the workflow template prepares.
What the practice manager supplied
The request
Please prepare the coverage plan for Attorney B's leave.
Plan date: Wednesday 11 November 2026.
Practice lead: Attorney A.
Lawyer staff roles: Partner, Senior associate, Associate.
When the responsible attorney is the person away, Attorney A confirms.
Matter-file access is decided by the confirming lawyer.
Settings: our defaults (return buffer 7 days, screen list up to 7 days old).
Attached: leave.csv, matters.csv, assignments.csv, staff.csv,
role-requirements.txt, confirmed-dates.csv, screen-list.csv, access.csv.
leave.csv (from the leave record)
person,start,end,kind,status
Attorney B,2026-11-23,2026-12-11,leave,approved
Attorney F,2026-12-07,2026-12-09,leave,approved
Attorney A,2026-12-02,2026-12-03,leave,requested
Attorney D,2026-11-02,2026-11-04,leave,approved
matters.csv (export from the case system)
matter_id,matter_name,client,team,responsible_attorney,status,restricted
M-3101,Supply dispute,Client A,Disputes,Attorney B,open,no
M-3102,Warehouse lease claim,Client B,Disputes,Attorney B,open,no
M-3103,Shareholder arbitration,Client C,Disputes,Attorney B,open,yes
M-3104,Distribution claim,Client D,Disputes,Attorney F,open,no
M-3105,Equipment warranty claim,Client E,Disputes,Attorney B,closed,no
M-3106,Insurance recovery,Client F,Disputes,Attorney C,open,no
assignments.csv (export from the case system)
matter_id,person,matter_role,backup
M-3101,Attorney B,Responsible attorney,Attorney C
M-3101,Attorney D,Associate,
M-3101,Paralegal G,Paralegal,Paralegal H
M-3102,Attorney B,Responsible attorney,Attorney F
M-3102,Paralegal H,Paralegal,
M-3103,Attorney B,Responsible attorney,Attorney C
M-3103,Paralegal G,Paralegal,
M-3104,Attorney F,Responsible attorney,
M-3104,Attorney B,Associate,Attorney E
M-3105,Attorney B,Responsible attorney,
M-3106,Attorney C,Responsible attorney,Attorney B
M-3106,Paralegal H,Paralegal,
staff.csv (from the staff list)
person,staff_role,team,qualifications,cover_limit
Attorney A,Partner,Disputes,admitted-jurisdiction-k; arbitration,3
Attorney B,Senior associate,Disputes,admitted-jurisdiction-k,2
Attorney D,Associate,Disputes,admitted-jurisdiction-k,2
Attorney C,Senior associate,Disputes,admitted-jurisdiction-k; arbitration,2
Attorney E,Associate,Disputes,,2
Attorney F,Partner,Disputes,admitted-jurisdiction-k,
Paralegal G,Paralegal,Disputes,,3
Paralegal H,Paralegal,Disputes,,2
role-requirements.txt (approved by the practice lead)
Disputes team · Role requirements for matter cover
Dated: 2026-10-01 Review by: 2027-03-31
Approved by: Attorney A, practice lead. Changes go through Attorney A.
Cover rules: who may cover each matter role
C-1 Responsible attorney: Partner or Senior associate.
C-2 Associate: Senior associate or Associate.
C-3 Paralegal: Paralegal.
Matter requirements: qualifications the cover must hold
R-1 M-3101, Responsible attorney: admitted-jurisdiction-k
R-2 M-3103, Responsible attorney: admitted-jurisdiction-k; arbitration
R-3 M-3104, Associate: admitted-jurisdiction-k
A matter or role with no line above needs nothing beyond C-1 to C-3.
"admitted-jurisdiction-k" means admitted to practise in Jurisdiction K.
confirmed-dates.csv (export of attorney-confirmed dates)
matter_id,date,commitment,confirmed_by,confirmed_on
M-3101,2026-11-25,Serve responses to second document requests,Attorney B,2026-11-02
M-3101,2026-12-08,Case management conference,Attorney B,2026-10-20
M-3101,,Settlement meeting with Client A (date to be agreed),,
M-3102,2026-12-03,Mediation session,Attorney B,2026-10-28
M-3102,2026-12-16,Expert report exchange,,
M-3103,2026-12-01,Hearing on the procedural timetable,Attorney B,2026-11-05
M-3104,2026-12-17,Exchange of witness statements,Attorney F,2026-11-06
M-3104,2027-01-12,Pre-trial review,Attorney F,2026-11-06
M-3106,2026-12-10,Disclosure list due,Attorney C,2026-10-30
screen-list.csv (from the conflicts clerk)
as of 2026-11-10, from Conflicts clerk
matter_id,person,kind,recorded_by,recorded_on
M-3103,Attorney C,barrier,Conflicts clerk,2026-09-14
M-3104,Attorney D,conflict,Conflicts clerk,2026-10-02
access.csv (who has access to each matter file)
matter_id,person
M-3101,Attorney B
M-3101,Attorney C
M-3101,Attorney D
M-3101,Paralegal G
M-3101,Paralegal H
M-3102,Attorney B
M-3102,Paralegal H
M-3103,Attorney B
M-3103,Paralegal G
M-3104,Attorney B
M-3104,Attorney F
M-3106,Attorney B
M-3106,Attorney C
M-3106,Paralegal H
What the workflow template prepares
DRAFT COVERAGE PLAN
For Attorney A, practice lead, and the confirming lawyers named below.
A proposal only. It gives no legal advice. It decides nothing about
legal meaning, merit, validity, privilege, conflicts, information
barriers or deadlines, clears no one, and says nothing about what anyone
may rely on. It sends, files, signs and calendars nothing.
Nothing has been sent, filed, signed or calendared. No message has been
written. No assignment or access has changed. No date was set. No one
was contacted.
NOTE TO THE PRACTICE MANAGER
- Stops: none.
- Blocked: M-3103, Responsible attorney: restricted matter, the named
backup is on the screen list; M-3104, Associate: the backup lacks R-3,
one person on the screen list, one at their cover limit.
- Dates to chase: M-3102 2026-12-16 Expert report exchange (NOT
CONFIRMED); M-3101 Settlement meeting with Client A (date to be
agreed) (no date recorded).
- Deciders away: Attorney A (practice lead; confirms M-3101, M-3103 and
M-3102): leave requested for 2026-12-02 to 2026-12-03, not yet
decided. Attorney F (confirms M-3104): away 2026-12-07 to 2026-12-09.
- Deciders on the screen list: none.
- Not acted on: none.
- Authorities in the files: none.
I have changed no assignment or access, set no date, written no message
and contacted no one. Nothing changes until the practice lead agrees and
the confirming lawyers confirm.
Person away: Attorney B, Senior associate, Disputes
Absence: leave 2026-11-23 to 2026-12-11, status approved
Cover period: 2026-11-23 to 2026-12-11 (start and end from the leave
record)
Commitment window: 2026-11-23 to 2026-12-18 (cover period end 2026-12-11
+ return buffer 7 days = 2026-12-18)
Plan date: 2026-11-11
Prepared for: Attorney A, practice lead, to agree coverage
Confirming lawyers: Attorney A for M-3101, M-3103 and M-3102 (in place
of Attorney B, away); Attorney F for M-3104; Attorney C for M-3106
(also affected)
Settings: return buffer 7 days (default); screen list age limit 7 days
(default); open-ended horizon 42 days (default, not used); open matter
word "open" (default); restricted word "yes" (default); approved word
"approved" (default); qualifications separator ";" (default); column
headers (default); lawyer staff roles Partner, Senior associate,
Associate (as supplied).
SUMMARY
Roles to cover: 4 on 4 matters. Cover proposed: 2. Blocked: 2.
Commitments in the window: 5 confirmed, 1 NOT CONFIRMED,
1 with no date recorded.
MATTERS AFFECTED
1. M-3101 Supply dispute | Client A | role to cover:
Responsible attorney | responsible attorney: Attorney B (away) |
restricted: no | earliest confirmed commitment: 2026-11-25
2. M-3103 Shareholder arbitration | Client C | role to cover:
Responsible attorney | responsible attorney: Attorney B (away) |
restricted: yes | earliest confirmed commitment: 2026-12-01
3. M-3102 Warehouse lease claim | Client B | role to cover:
Responsible attorney | responsible attorney: Attorney B (away) |
restricted: no | earliest confirmed commitment: 2026-12-03
4. M-3104 Distribution claim | Client D | role to cover:
Associate | responsible attorney: Attorney F |
restricted: no | earliest confirmed commitment: 2026-12-17
Not planned: M-3105 Equipment warranty claim, status "closed" in the
matter list.
Also affected: M-3106 Insurance recovery: Attorney B is the named
backup for Attorney C (Responsible attorney). No backup during the
cover period. Commitments in the window on this matter:
- 2026-12-10, Thursday: Disclosure list due. Confirmed by Attorney C
on 2026-10-30.
PROPOSED COVER
M-3101 Responsible attorney -> Attorney C (Senior associate), 2026-11-23
to 2026-12-11
Found at: step 1 named backup, rule C-1
Away: no leave row in the cover period. Screen list: no row of the
list supplied, read or unread, names this person with this matter.
Requirements: R-1 admitted-jurisdiction-k: in the staff list.
Capacity: 1 of 2 in this plan.
Also tested: none.
M-3102 Responsible attorney -> Attorney C (Senior associate), 2026-11-23
to 2026-12-11
Found at: step 3 in the team, rule C-1
Away: no leave row in the cover period. Screen list: no row of the
list supplied, read or unread, names this person with this matter.
Requirements: none in the role requirements file. Capacity: 2 of 2
in this plan.
Also tested: Attorney F (step 1 named backup): away 2026-12-07 to
2026-12-09; cover limit not recorded. Attorney A (step 3 in the
team): leave requested for 2026-12-02 to 2026-12-03, not yet decided.
COMMITMENTS IN THE ABSENCE
M-3101 Supply dispute
- 2026-11-25, Wednesday: Serve responses to second document requests.
Confirmed by Attorney B on 2026-11-02.
- 2026-12-08, Tuesday: Case management conference. Confirmed by
Attorney B on 2026-10-20.
- No date recorded: Settlement meeting with Client A (date to be agreed).
M-3103 Shareholder arbitration
- 2026-12-01, Tuesday: Hearing on the procedural timetable. Confirmed by
Attorney B on 2026-11-05.
M-3102 Warehouse lease claim
- 2026-12-03, Thursday: Mediation session. Confirmed by Attorney B on
2026-10-28.
- 2026-12-16, Wednesday: Expert report exchange. NOT CONFIRMED.
after return
M-3104 Distribution claim
- 2026-12-17, Thursday: Exchange of witness statements. Confirmed by
Attorney F on 2026-11-06. after return
ACCESS NEEDED
- Attorney C, M-3101: listed in the access record.
- Attorney C, M-3102: not listed in the access record. For Attorney A
to decide, after Attorney A confirms the conflict check and scope and
Attorney A agrees the cover.
BLOCKED HANDOFFS
M-3103 Shareholder arbitration · Responsible attorney · restricted: yes
- Tested: Attorney C (step 1 named backup): on the screen list for
M-3103 (barrier, recorded by Conflicts clerk on 2026-09-14).
- No one else on the matter holds a role rule C-1 allows.
- Restricted: no one outside the matter was tested.
- Commitments in the window with no proposed cover:
- 2026-12-01, Tuesday: Hearing on the procedural timetable. Confirmed
by Attorney B on 2026-11-05.
- For Attorney A to decide; Attorney A confirms.
M-3104 Distribution claim · Associate · restricted: no
- Tested: Attorney E (step 1 named backup): does not hold
admitted-jurisdiction-k (R-3).
- Tested: Attorney D (step 3 in the team): on the screen list for
M-3104 (conflict, recorded by Conflicts clerk on 2026-10-02).
- Tested: Attorney C (step 3 in the team): cover limit reached (2 of 2
in this plan).
- No one else on the matter holds a role rule C-2 allows.
- Commitments in the window with no proposed cover:
- 2026-12-17, Thursday: Exchange of witness statements. Confirmed by
Attorney F on 2026-11-06. after return
- For Attorney A to decide; Attorney F confirms.
CAPACITY
- Attorney C: 2 of 2 covers in this plan (M-3101, M-3102)
Covers a person already holds outside this plan are not counted.
COULD NOT READ
- None.
TO CONFIRM
For Attorney A, practice lead:
[ ] M-3101 Responsible attorney: Attorney C covers 2026-11-23 to
2026-12-11. Agree or change: ____
[ ] M-3103 Responsible attorney: blocked. Who covers? Decision: ____
[ ] M-3102 Responsible attorney: Attorney C covers 2026-11-23 to
2026-12-11. Agree or change: ____
[ ] M-3104 Associate: blocked. Who covers? Decision: ____
[ ] M-3106: no backup for Attorney C in the period. Decision: ____
For Attorney A, on M-3101 (in place of Attorney B, away):
[ ] Are the commitments listed complete, and their dates right?
Confirm or correct: ____
[ ] Settlement meeting with Client A (date to be agreed) has no date
recorded. Date, or none due: ____
[ ] Conflict check for Attorney C on this matter. This plan read only
the screen list supplied and clears no one.
Checked with the conflicts team, and result: ____
[ ] What Attorney C may do on this matter. Scope: ____
For Attorney A, on M-3103 (in place of Attorney B, away):
[ ] Are the commitments listed complete, and their dates right?
Confirm or correct: ____
For Attorney A, on M-3102 (in place of Attorney B, away):
[ ] Are the commitments listed complete, and their dates right?
Confirm or correct: ____
[ ] 2026-12-16 Expert report exchange is NOT CONFIRMED.
Confirm or correct: ____
[ ] Conflict check for Attorney C on this matter. This plan read only
the screen list supplied and clears no one.
Checked with the conflicts team, and result: ____
[ ] What Attorney C may do on this matter. Scope: ____
[ ] Access for Attorney C to the matter file, after the two lines
above and the practice lead's agreement. Grant or refuse: ____
For Attorney F, on M-3104:
[ ] Are the commitments listed complete, and their dates right?
Confirm or correct: ____
For Attorney C, on M-3106 (also affected):
[ ] Are the commitments listed complete, and their dates right?
Confirm or correct: ____
CHECK
- Files: leave record 4 rows; matter list 6; assignments 12; staff list
8; role requirements file dated 2026-10-01; confirmed dates 9; screen
list as of 2026-11-10, 2 rows; access record 14.
- Role requirements: dated 2026-10-01, approved by Attorney A, review by
2027-03-31; in date on 2026-11-11.
- Screen list: as of 2026-11-10, from Conflicts clerk; 1 day old (plan
date 2026-11-11 minus 2026-11-10); limit 7 days. 2 rows = 2 read
+ 0 could not read; each row that could not be read is applied as the
Screen list test says, and listed under COULD NOT READ.
- Deciders checked against the leave record and the screen list:
Attorney A, Attorney F, Attorney C; 2 flagged in the note.
- Roles: 4 to cover = 2 proposed + 2 blocked.
- Confirmed dates export: 9 rows = 5 in the window confirmed +
1 in the window NOT CONFIRMED + 1 no date + 1 listed under
Also affected + 1 outside the window + 0 on other matters
+ 0 could not read.
- Every commitment date above is copied from the confirmed dates
export and every leave date from the leave record. The only
arithmetic is the window and the screen list's age.
- No case, statute or rule of law is named from memory; 0 found in
the files, listed in the note, none applied.
- The screen list is read as supplied, rows that could not be read
included. This plan clears no one and decides no conflict or barrier.
Agreed by (practice lead): ____________ Date: ________
Until this line is signed, this is a draft and no cover is agreed.
The practice manager checks one proposed cover and one blocked handoff against the files, then takes the plan to Attorney A. Attorney A agrees the cover, decides M-3103 and M-3104, and confirms dates, the conflict check for Attorney C, scope and access on the three matters Attorney B leads; Attorney F confirms on M-3104 and Attorney C on M-3106. The note has already told the practice manager that Attorney A has requested leave on 2 and 3 December and that Attorney F is away from 7 to 9 December. Only then do the firm's own people change any assignment or access.
Where it fits
- Operations and process improvement, which owns how work is staffed and handed over.
- People and HR, where approved leave and staffing changes are recorded and the plan starts.
- Law firms, where a matter's recorded commitments still need someone named against them during leave, and a cover the firm's own records block is costly to discover late.
- Established businesses, where cover has long been arranged in the hallway and lives in one person's head.
- Growth & scaling, when a team grows past the point where the practice lead knows every matter by heart.
Weekly open-matter check is the regular sweep for overdue tasks; this plan is for one absence. Matter-opening checklist preparation is where each matter's team and backup are first recorded. When someone is leaving for good, departing-employee knowledge capture is the handover.
What has to change for your company
The role requirements file is yours, and the plan is only as good as it. The practice lead decides which staff roles may cover which matter roles, whether cover must stay within the team, and which matters need a named qualification in their cover, written exactly as the staff list records it. Set each person's cover limit. Agree with the conflicts team how the screen list is produced and how old it may be. Name who confirms when the responsible attorney is the one away, who decides matter-file access, and where confirmations are recorded. Replace the column headers with the ones your exports really use.
We sit with the practice manager who arranges cover today and the practice lead who approves it, write down what is really done, and set it up in the AI product the firm has approved: ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot or Gemini. Your firm keeps control of how the work gets done.
What has been checked
Fully Powered AI wrote this workflow template from its own published map of law-firm work. It was editorially reviewed on 11 November 2026. It was tried on its invented example in Claude on 11 November 2026, with follow-up questions meant to draw out advice, a drafted letter or a decision, and planted items in the inputs; the record is published with the template. A separate review of the legal boundary found faults after the ordinary review had passed it, including improvised replies to those follow-up questions, and the template was tightened for each. The latest run was made by the session that corrected the template, so it shows the instructions produce the published example, not how a fresh reader would do. It has not been reviewed by a lawyer. It has not yet been tested in a client environment. It has not yet been tested as a packaged version in ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot or Gemini.
Testing in your firm means running it on past absences your practice lead already planned, with cases written in advance: a named backup on the screen list, a restricted matter, a missing qualification, a cover limit used up by an earlier matter, a screen list that is too old and a commitment nobody confirmed. The practice manager checks every proposed cover against the files before anyone relies on it. Pilot acceptance-test preparation sets those cases up, and what we test before we call an AI workflow ready describes the record we keep.
Who decides
Your people keep
- Each proposed cover
- Every blocked handoff
- Conflict check for anyone joining a matter
- What the cover may do on the matter
- Matter-file access
It does not
- Gives no legal advice
- Decides nothing about legal meaning, merit, validity, privilege, conflicts or deadlines
- Sends, files, signs and calendars nothing
- Clears no one on conflicts
- Changes no assignment or access
- Writes no email, letter or notice for anyone
Questions people ask
Who is it for?
The practice manager starts it, and the practice lead, a lawyer, agrees or changes each proposed cover and decides every blocked handoff.
What do I need to supply?
The request, the leave record, three exports from the case system or practice records, the role requirements file, the attorney-confirmed dates, the screen list and the access record if the firm keeps one.
What does it not do?
It gives no legal advice and decides nothing about legal meaning, merit, validity, privilege, conflicts or deadlines, and it clears no one. The lawyers decide and sign.
What do I get?
A draft plan for the practice lead with a proposed cover for each matter, the commitments in the absence, the access each cover needs and every blocked handoff, with a line for each lawyer to confirm.
What has been checked?
It was editorially reviewed and tried on its invented example in Claude on 11 November 2026. It has not been reviewed by a lawyer, and it has not yet been tested in a client environment.
The full workflow template
Everything above is the outline. The complete workflow template is the working version: the roles, the inputs, the procedure, the exceptions and stop conditions, the output format, the reviewer checklist, the acceptance tests, the instructions for an AI assistant and what to customize for your company. It comes with a download and the link to its folder in Fully Powered’s public repository.
Free with an account. Sign in by email: no password and no card.
Next step
Put this workflow template to work for your team: on your plan, or built with you in a sprint.
Build this in a sprint
In a sprint, Fully Powered adapts this workflow template to your rules, proves it on your own work and puts it in the hands of the roles that own it.
Two ways to begin: