Three flows, walked onto the board

Sales, corporate housekeeping, our own matter. Three of the things we actually run, not three legal workflows: the same board has to carry all of them or it is not an operating model. Each row is one step: how it works today, then the same step on the board, as what brings the data in, who runs it and from which tier, where it lands. Nothing is built. If a step has no Today, it is invented. If Today and the board read the same, it is not worth building.

Where it lands is the memory bank's own model: a scope is the permission boundary, a context is what accumulates inside it, a cubby belongs to one agent.

Flow one

Internal sales

		Today	On the board
	Step	How it works now	Brings it in	Who runs it, and the agent	Where it lands
1	A lead appears	Campaigns in the outreach tool plus inbound from the site. One workspace carries several audiences at once	Campaign lists, inbound form fills, connection replies	Whoever owns that channel 1st party intake	scope `sales`, context = the account
2	Outreach and replies	Pulled from the tool's API on a five minute cron, because the push webhook stopped when the inbox moved. Only the latest message reaches the CRM	Same pull on a timer, but the whole thread, both directions	The seller 1st party connector	events into `sales` on that context
3	A call happens	Recorded and transcribed. Reaches no record	Recorder plus notes	The seller 2nd party recorder	same context, one event per call
4	Where does this stand	Stage sits in the CRM while the decisive human labels are set in a separate inbox and never arrive	Reads the thread and the calls, proposes stage, next step, objection	Agent for the seller, a person confirms 1st party	the pipeline agent's cubby, proposed until marked
5	What did we promise them	Nowhere. It exists only inside threads	Each commitment with the sentence it came from	Agent for the seller 1st party	same agent, second cubby
6	Pipeline across accounts	A dashboard reading the CRM live, which is the surface the team reports off	Rolls up every account context	Agent for the owner 1st party	a roll-up cubby, or the Concierge if more than one agent contributes
7	What we learned	Runbooks in a repo and a wiki page	The objections, and the replies that worked	Owner keeps or drops. No agent	scope `firm`

Worked example: a coach inquiry on manykind.ai. Today the hero form takes an email and nothing else and posts it to /api/waitlist, which writes one CRM row: name set to the email address, pipeline ICP coach, vertical cross-vertical because the form never asks, stage New, notes holding the site variant and any UTM. No owner, no dedupe on repeat submits, and nothing schedules a follow-up. On the board that same submit opens the account context at step 1; the reply thread and the intro call attach to it at 2 and 3; step 4 proposes the stage from the thread rather than leaving it at New forever; and if we answer the inquiry with a promise, step 5 holds it with the sentence it was made in. The delta is not the capture, we already capture. It is that the row currently has nowhere to grow.

Flow two

Corporate housekeeping

		Today	On the board
	Step	How it works now	Brings it in	Who runs it, and the agent	Where it lands
1	List the entities and what each owes	Rows on the lanes sheet, grouped by lane, each pointing at a drive folder	The register extract and the statutes	Owner. No agent	scope `corporate`, context = the entity. Ownership and cash as separate links
2	Bring in formation and governance docs	Eight labelled subfolders in the drive package	Register extract, statutes, founding minutes, signing authorities	Operator 1st party ingest	the bucket, referenced from the entity context
3	Catch the incoming notices	A morning sweep reads mail and chat and reports what arrived. Some invoices only ever reach a third person's inbox	Registered agent mail, portals, and the inboxes that actually receive them	Operator 1st party connector	events into `corporate` on that entity context
4	Turn notices into dates	A due date column, plus a separate tracker holding have, missing and open questions	The deadline, what it demands, and what would close it	Agent for the operator 1st party	the calendar agent's cubby, one row per obligation
5	Do the recurring filing	Signatures chased over mail, with who may sign rediscovered each time	Fills the template. Checks who may sign before asking anyone	Operator prepares, an authorised signatory signs 2nd party, per jurisdiction	an event, so the filing and the signature sit in the log
6	Set up something new	No checklist object. Each setup starts from the last one somebody remembers	The checklist for that jurisdiction	Operator, owner signs 2nd party formation agent	the bucket, referenced from a new entity context
7	What we learned	A checked column on the sheet, a date stamped by hand to say the row was verified against its source	The checklist per jurisdiction	Owner keeps or drops. No agent	scope `firm`. The checked column retires: the event carries its own provenance

Worked example: a new corporate matter for the DAO. The extraordinary general assembly notice goes out this week. Today that lives as a lane row, a due date and a mail thread. On the board: step 3 catches the notice as an event on the entity context, including the copies that only ever reach an adviser's inbox. Step 4 turns it into obligations that carry what would close each one, so the thirty day notice period, the assembly itself, the resolutions on signing authority and the register filing that follows are four dated rows rather than one. Step 5 checks the authorised signatories before anyone is asked, which matters here because signature is joint by two and only some of the named people can give it. Step 2 files the register extract and the minutes that come out of it against the entity, not against whoever received them.

Flow three

Our own matter

		Today	On the board
	Step	How it works now	Brings it in	Who runs it, and the agent	Where it lands
1	Open the matter, name who is on it	The list of what is pending came from outside counsel as an attachment. We worked from a smaller number than the real one for months	Counsel's own list of what is pending	Lead counsel. No agent	one scope per matter, one for the separate track. Index in `firm`
2	Find every communication on a topic	Searches run by hand across mail and drive, one spelling at a time	Search from a term list carrying every spelling of a name	Paralegal, for lead counsel 1st party sweep	events into the matter scope, context = the sweep
3	Bring in the documents	A corpus on the desktop, working notes in one tree, source PDFs in downloads	Drop, folder, scan, and open the attachments	Paralegal 1st party ingest	the DDC bucket behind the vault. Matter scopes reference it
4	Bring in outside reports	Sit in shared drive folders, read by hand	Whole and unedited, from wherever they live now	Lead counsel 2nd party report reader	same bucket, one object per report, never rewritten
5	The eval scan	Claim and evidence work done ad hoc, rebuilt each time somebody asks	What we assert, what supports it, what is missing	Agent for lead counsel 1st party	the claim agent's cubby in that matter scope
6	Write it so it holds	Long documents where a statement and its support can drift apart	Every statement carries its quote and where the quote sits	Lead counsel approves 1st party	same agent, findings cubby, plus an event
7	Hand a copy to outside counsel	Attachments mailed out, with no way to withdraw them	A scoped, time limited copy, not the matter	Lead counsel signs. They connect their own 3rd party agent	its own scope, so their agreement covers nothing else
8	What we learned	The search patterns live in one person's head	The term lists and the intake checklist	Lead counsel keeps or drops. No agent	scope `firm`

Worked example: a new finding in our own matter. A sweep at step 2 runs the term list including the spelling variants and returns a message whose attachment nobody had opened. Step 3 puts the attachment in the bucket once, addressed by content. Step 5 attaches it to the assertion it bears on, and because the same document touches more than one of the pending matters it is referenced from each rather than copied into each. Step 6 will not write the statement unless it carries the quote and where the quote sits. If it goes to outside counsel, step 7 makes it a scoped copy in its own scope with a time limit, instead of an attachment on a mail we cannot take back.

Two things the Today column settles. The tracker deliberately keeps the matter off it, which is exactly why a matter has to be its own scope and not a lane on a shared board. And all three flows fail today in the same place, capture: the reply, the notice sent to somebody else's inbox, and the exhibit inside an unopened attachment all exist, and none of them reach a record without a person moving them.

Where it starts, how it is read back

The second and third exercise

Flow	Starts at	Read back by
Sales	The channel that produced the lead	Asking the pipeline agent inside `sales`. It cites the thread or call the claim came from
Corporate	The register extract	Asking inside `corporate` for one entity context. The calendar answers what is owed and what closed it
Matter	Counsel's list, then the sweep, then the documents	Asking inside the matter scope. The answer is a finding carrying its quote, so the citation is the read path

A person reads through an agent connected to that scope, never by browsing storage. So the read path and the permission are one object and there is no second access model to keep in sync.

Mart to Fred · 18 Aug 2026 · nothing built. Grounded in the memory bank: 04-cef/user-vault/vault.md verified 27 Jul 2026 · user-vault/concierge/permissions.md, ADR-029 and ADR-005 · agent-marketplace/marketplace.md verified 15 Jul 2026, ADR-038 · ADR-015 bootstrap via replay · 05-product/enterprise-experience.md, scaffolding only, verified 14 May 2026.