Proposals and SOWs

Review scope, price, and terms before the client sees them.

Delivery, finance, and legal comment on the internal draft. Agent connect reworks a phase that assumed people you do not have. The client copy still goes out from your existing tool.

Set it up for your agent How agent connect works

liveproposals/orchardline-rebrand-sow.md

Orchardline rebrand SOW

Owner: Tessa Nguyen. Studio: Driftglass Studio. Client: Orchardline Grocers.

Twelve-week rebrand SOW for Orchardline Grocers, written by Driftglass Studio. Internal review only. Orchardline still receives the SOW from the studio's proposal tool after the dates and the fee survive this pass.

Phase 1

Two weeks of interviews with store managers and the brand owner, in the stores, not in a workshop.
One designer. The audit and the first routes fit in those two weeks if the interviews stay on the calendar.
Orchardline reviews the routes before any visual work starts. Silence is not approval.

Phase 2

Phase 2 fee is priced for two designers.

Phase 2 runs four weeks with two designers.Phase 2 is six weeks with one designer, not two designers.

The studio has one designer for this work. The fee table still says two, and finance has not signed a new number. Leave the fee for Ellen. The dates above are the part this edit changes.

Phase 3

Four weeks for the system to land in two stores. One designer, the same person as phase 2.
Orchardline's staff put the signs up. The studio does a single on-site check, then stops.

Not in this SOW

Packaging production and the print buy stay with Orchardline. Driftglass does not place the print.
A second brand, if they ask, is a change request after phase 3.

priced for two designers

Ellen Park

Phase 2 is priced as if we have two designers.

Kofi Mensah

We have one. The dates have to move.

four weeks with two designers

Kofi Mensah

@agent the timeline assumes two designers, we have one, redo phase 2.

agent

Reworked phase 2 for one designer. Leaving this open so finance can check the fee.

Start with @agent to ask the agent

ResolveReply

Fictional example: a Driftglass Studio SOW for Orchardline Grocers, with a finance thread and a scripted agent connect reply.

How proposals get reviewed today

Email attachments get finance and legal on a draft. They also create three files, and the agent keeps editing a fourth.

A shared doc is a reasonable internal pass. It is the wrong last step for a client. Gander stays the internal review. The proposal the client receives still leaves from the tool you already use.

One designer, not two

Tessa Nguyen asks her agent for a twelve-week rebrand SOW for Orchardline Grocers, a fictional regional chain, written by Driftglass Studio. She runs gander watch on proposals/orchardline-rebrand-sow.md and sends the link to Kofi Mensah and Ellen Park.

Ellen highlights the fee table and says phase 2 is priced for two designers. Kofi replies that the studio has one. That thread is human.

Kofi starts a new comment: "@agent the timeline assumes two designers, we have one, redo phase 2." Tessa's agent reworks phase 2, replies, and leaves the thread open because the dates and the fee both move. Ellen checks the new numbers on the same link. Orchardline still receives the SOW from Driftglass's existing proposal tool.

Who's in the doc

WriterDelivery leadFinanceThe author's agent

Writer AE or services lead. The link is internal.

Delivery lead Checks that the timeline matches the people on the team.

Finance Checks price, margin, and terms.

The author's agent Redoes the phase when delivery uses agent connect.

Reviewers only need a browser. Talk to each other in normal threads. Use agent connect when you want the draft changed.

Agents that fit proposals and sows

Grok BotA prose SOW from a brief, with agent connect through the Gander MCP server.

Claude CodeWhen the draft lives in a repo, MCP carries agent connect back to the author.

Finish the internal review on the live draft. Send the client the file from the tool you already use for that.

See how it works on the homepage