Skip to content

Scope Change Request Drafter

Example prompt: "When I forward a client email to scope@ourdomain.com, find the matching project's original SOW in Google Drive and the rate card in Google Sheets. Compare what the client is asking for against the agreed scope and identify what's in, what's out, and what's ambiguous. Draft a short change request in Google Docs that restates the new ask, lists what's already covered, lists the additional work, gives an estimated effort range and indicative cost, and proposes a revised timeline. Draft a polite reply in Gmail attaching or linking the change request — leave it as a draft — and post the link in #ops on Slack so the project lead can sanity-check before it goes."

The Problem

Scope creep rarely arrives as a request to renegotiate; it arrives as "could you also just…" buried in a Tuesday afternoon email. Saying yes feels like good service. Saying no feels like being difficult. So the work gets done, the project goes over, and nobody mentions it until the post-mortem. The right answer is almost always a change request — but writing one means stopping to re-read the SOW, look up the rate card, estimate the effort, and find a tone that doesn't feel transactional. By the time we get round to it, the work has often already started.

How GloriaMundo Solves It

We build a workflow triggered by forwarding the client email to a dedicated alias. An integration step pulls the original message and identifies the matching project from our project list. Integration steps fetch the original SOW from the project's Google Drive folder and the rate card from Google Sheets. An LLM step compares the new ask against the agreed scope and produces a structured analysis — what is already covered, what is genuinely new, what is ambiguous and needs clarification. A second LLM step drafts a one-page change request in Google Docs covering the new ask, the delta from the original scope, an effort range with a low and high bound, an indicative cost, and a revised timeline impact. A third LLM step drafts a polite Gmail reply that links the change request and frames the conversation collaboratively. Both drafts sit in the Glass Box preview alongside a Slack message in #ops with the link, so the project lead can sanity-check before it goes to the client.

Example Workflow Steps

  1. Trigger (webhook): Forwarded email arrives at scope@ourdomain.com.
  2. Step 1 (integration): Read the forwarded email body and identify the originating client and project.
  3. Step 2 (integration): Fetch the project's signed SOW from the matching Google Drive folder.
  4. Step 3 (integration): Read the relevant rate card and effort benchmarks from our 'Rates' tab in Google Sheets.
  5. Step 4 (llm): Analyse the ask against the SOW — what's already in scope, what's genuinely new, what needs clarification.
  6. Step 5 (conditional): If everything is already in scope, post a quick note in #ops and stop. Otherwise continue.
  7. Step 6 (llm): Draft a structured change request document covering the new ask, scope delta, effort range, indicative cost, and revised timeline.
  8. Step 7 (integration): Save the change request as a Google Doc in the project's 'Change Requests' folder.
  9. Step 8 (llm): Draft a collaborative reply email that links the change request and proposes a short call to align if needed.
  10. Step 9 (integration): Save the reply as a draft in Gmail addressed to the client contact.
  11. Step 10 (integration): Post the change request link and draft email link in #ops on Slack for the project lead.

Integrations Used

  • Gmail — receives the forwarded email and stores the drafted reply
  • Google Drive — source of the original SOW and destination for the change request document
  • Google Sheets — holds the rate card and effort benchmarks
  • Google Docs — destination for the structured change request
  • Slack — the ops channel sees the link for project-lead sign-off

Who This Is For

Agency project leads, studio principals, and consultants who don't want to absorb scope creep but find the change-request paperwork slow enough that they often don't bother.

Time & Cost Saved

A proper change request — re-reading the SOW, estimating effort, costing it, writing the doc, and drafting a reply that lands well — is comfortably an hour of focused work, which is exactly why it gets skipped in favour of doing the extra work for free. This workflow brings the upfront effort to a 10-minute review of the drafts. The financial saving is the work that gets paid for instead of absorbed; the relationship saving is having a calm document to reference instead of a tense conversation later.