Responsibility before execution
Map the action.
Name who approves it.
Separate a suggested step from one that sends, changes or publishes something. Use a paper approval map before connecting any systems.
Map the approval boundary Explore the approachFor a workflow idea that needs explicit control.
This is a method you can read and use independently. Begin with the question, follow the prompts, and keep uncertainty visible.
Trigger and scope
Name the exact initiating event, exclusions, rate limits and who owns the source.
02Input and data boundary
List each field, sensitivity, source, recipient and retention question.
03Draft versus action
Mark which steps only suggest and which could send, update, spend or publish.
04Failure and retry
Test wrong category, duplicate event, timeout, unavailable integration and reviewer absence.
05Audit and withdrawal
Describe versioned prompts or rules, logs, rollback, deletion and who can disable the workflow.
Leave with a record.
Not a promise.
A useful next step can be a decision to wait. The purpose is to make the reasoning available for inspection.
Your output
An approval map
An approval map with trigger boundaries, data questions, side effects, failure handling and stop ownership.
A reason to pause
Keep the boundary explicit
Pause when an action has no authorised decision owner or a failure has no safe manual fallback.