A work order is the written assignment you give an agent. Prepare it as you would for a colleague who will work for a while before returning. Writing down the purpose and the decisions you reserve clarifies the job for both of you.

The work order can name material you have already prepared. Your workflow identifies when proposed questions return for selection; the harness, or working setup, supplies the notes and examples. The order assigns the agent its job within that setup. Identify the approved versions so it uses the right material.

For the interview outline, the work order can fit in one paragraph. Read this as an assignment to someone who has the notes but wasn't at the first meeting:

Using only these fictional interview notes and my initial question list, prepare a draft outline for a second interview. Keep my questions identifiable and label your proposed additions. Explain which unanswered point each addition addresses. Do not invent answers or contact anyone. If the notes conflict or do not support a proposed factual statement, identify the problem for my review. Return the outline to me for selection and revision.

When the outline comes back, these instructions give you something specific to check. Can you still identify your original questions? Do the additions address gaps in the notes? Did the agent leave unknown facts open? You can then choose and revise the questions for the interview. Preparing the outline hasn't authorized the agent to contact the client.

Here, you allow a provisional outline and review both its question choices and its organization afterward. If those choices need your attention sooner, reserve selection before organization. The diagram later in this section shows that second arrangement. Choose the review point according to what you need to decide before further work depends on it.

For a larger assignment, my work-order framework uses twelve fields. The client outcome explains why the work matters: help bakery owner Maya find out how to keep producing Monday’s order while the seller inspects her damaged mixer. The assignment and scope state the agent’s contribution: prepare follow-up interview questions from the supplied notes. The agent is not being asked to decide liability, advise the client, or make contact.

Inputs and trusted sources identify the material the agent may use, such as the supplied interview notes and your first question list. Tools and permissions identify what it can do with that material. Reading the selected file and preparing a draft do not require permission to send email or search unrelated client files.

The deliverable describes what you want back: an outline with your original questions identifiable and suggested additions labeled. The quality standard says what makes that outline useful: it covers important gaps without assuming answers. The evidence requirement tells the agent how to support its work: show the note or missing information that explains why each addition deserves attention.

Prohibited behavior identifies what the agent must not do, such as inventing an answer or contacting the client. Escalation triggers name problems that require your decision; conflicting accounts of the seller’s commitment should come back with both passages and an explanation of the decision affected. Human approval points identify decisions you have reserved even when no problem appears, such as selecting the questions before anyone uses the outline.

The test set contains examples you will use to check the assignment: clear notes, notes with a gap, and notes that conflict. Write the expected response for each. Finally, record and version specify what you will keep, where it belongs, and who updates it: the approved assignment, source versions, reviewed outline, and decisions in the authorized matter workspace. This record helps a later reviewer understand which version was used.

For the simple interview task, the short instruction above covers much of this in one paragraph. For a larger delegation, use the twelve fields to find missing decisions before the agent begins. The work order below applies them to a software contract dispute. Repeated service failures have put the client’s business at risk. The lawyer needs to assess the requirements for termination, including notice and the vendor’s opportunity to correct the failures.

Read a complete work order for the longer contract example

What should this work help the client achieve?: Help the client decide what must be established or done before terminating a software vendor for reported service failures.
What is the agent being asked to do?: Identify the relevant contractual requirements and compare them with the supplied factual record. Prepare an internal recommendation only after the lawyer reviews the comparison. Do not conduct new legal research or contact anyone.
Which sources may it use?: Use the signed agreement, the supplied amendment, service records, correspondence, and the lawyer’s governing-law analysis. Keep the source locations for each material finding.
Which tools and actions are permitted?: Read and compare the approved documents. Prepare tables and a draft for the lawyer. Do not send messages, share the source material elsewhere, or change any external records.
What should the agent return to you?: First provide separate requirements and timeline tables. Then compare the reviewed findings. After approval, prepare a one-page internal recommendation that preserves unresolved questions.
How will you judge whether the work is useful?: Address each relevant requirement and distinguish established evidence from allegations. Do not treat a sent notice as proof of receipt. The lawyer must be able to trace every material conclusion to the provided support.
What support must accompany the conclusions?: Cite the contract provision and record location for each material finding. Identify contrary evidence and information that the packet does not establish.
What must the agent not do?: Do not invent dates or missing documents. Do not assume that termination is permitted merely because a receipt date is established. Do not contact the client or vendor.
When must it stop and ask a person?: Stop before a complete recommendation if receipt evidence or another material requirement is unresolved. Return the missing information to the lawyer and ask how to proceed.
Who approves the important next steps?: The reviewing lawyer approves the comparison and the approach before drafting. The lawyer then reviews the draft before any external use. Adding a document does not count as approval.
Which examples should the workflow be tested on?: Test the plan with receipt evidence missing, supplied, and conflicting. Confirm that a missing amendment is reported and that a request to send the recommendation is declined because sending falls outside this assignment.
What record will be kept and updated?: Save the approved assignment, source versions, reviewed findings, decisions, and draft in the authorized matter workspace. The supervising lawyer maintains the current record.

A work order describes intended behavior. Before giving an agent consequential access, also inspect the actual product controls. A written prohibition on sending an email does not itself remove the ability to send one.

See how it works

Where the assignment returns to you

This illustrated work order reserves the choice of interview questions to the lawyer. Follow the handoffs across the three participants.

1. Lawyer → Agent
Assign the work
Use the bakery file and my assessment. Return proposed inquiries for selection.
2. Agent → Approved notes
Read the permitted notes
Access stays within the materials named in the assignment.
3. Approved notes → Agent
Bring back facts and gaps
Thursday inspection offered; repair timetable unknown.
4. Agent → Lawyer
Return proposed questions
Show what each addition would help us learn.
5. Lawyer → Agent
Choose and explain
Explore temporary arrangements now; ask about suitability and cost.
6. Agent → Lawyer
Return the arranged outline
The lawyer reviews it before the interview.

In this version of the assignment, selection returns to the lawyer before organization continues. Sending a message is outside the agent’s authority.