Keep the work and the agreement aligned
This third stage is where new requests meet the original scope. Compare the wording before deciding whether time, cost, or priorities should change.
Scroll to see all five stages
- 01ScopeScoping & ProposalsTurn the work, timing, and responsibilities into a shared plan.
- 02AgreeContracts & TermsUnderstand the wording, tradeoffs, and questions before signing.
- 03DeliverScope & CommunicationCompare new requests with the agreement and respond clearly.Current stage
- 04InvoiceInvoicing & PaymentCheck the figures and follow up without unnecessary friction.
- 05ResolveDisputes & Wind-downOrganize the facts and consider proportionate next steps.
Lucy’s Scope & Communication tool
Scope & Communication
Compare a new request with the agreed work, understand the likely impact, and draft a calm next-step message.
Your perspective
What Lucy checks
- Original deliverables and exclusions
- Revision and quantity limits
- The new request
- Timing, cost, and quality effects
- Included, additional, or ambiguous work
- Proportionate response options
Streamed as it is written
Lucy’s response
Lucy will organize the response into useful sections such as:
- Comparison
- Likely classification
- Evidence and assumptions
- Practical options
- Draft reply
Worked example
One request containing both clarification and added work
Situation
The scope includes five marketing pages. The client asks to correct mobile spacing and also requests two new campaign landing pages for the same launch date.
What stands out
Correcting agreed responsive behavior is likely included if the pages failed the stated standard. Two additional pages are likely additional. The unchanged deadline is an impact to discuss, not an automatic obligation.
Useful next step
Acknowledge the correction separately, then describe the two pages as a change and offer a fee/date option or a tradeoff that removes equivalent work.
Classify before answering
A useful response separates likely included work, likely additional work, and genuinely ambiguous work. A single message can contain all three.
- Quote the relevant scope or acceptance criterion instead of relying on memory.
- Describe the difference in output, quantity, audience, complexity, or approved direction.
- Treat ambiguity as a question to resolve, not proof that either side is acting badly.
Offer a workable route forward
A boundary is easier to use when it includes an option. The right option depends on value, capacity, timing, and the relationship.
- Price the addition and update the schedule after written approval.
- Keep the deadline by trading out work of similar effort.
- Defer the request to a later milestone or decline it clearly when capacity is unavailable.
What this tool cannot decide
Lucy compares the words you provide. She cannot see undocumented calls, judge work quality, estimate effort reliably, or decide which interpretation a court or platform would accept.
When human expertise matters
Get qualified help when a change affects regulated deliverables, safety, substantial unpaid work, formal platform deadlines, or a threatened claim.
Continue with the record
Common questions
How does the scope-creep checker work?
Provide the agreed scope and the new request. Lucy compares them, identifies what appears included, additional, or ambiguous, and explains the wording and assumptions behind that assessment.
Is every revision request scope creep?
No. A request may be included in an agreed revision round, may add new work, or may be unclear from the agreement. Lucy flags the distinction without assuming either party acted badly.
Can Lucy draft a message about added work?
Yes. She can draft a calm message that states the shared facts, explains the likely time or cost effect, and proposes options such as a change request, timeline adjustment, or scope tradeoff.