ScopeSnap

I tried adding an “AI reviewer” to ScopeSnap recently. The idea was simple: after generating a scope, have AI scan it and flag issues. I built it so it ran continuously while you edited. Technically, it worked. But using it felt rough: * findings would appear mid-edit * fixing one issue could trigger another * you never really knew when you were “done” It reminded me of a compiler yelling at you while you’re still typing. So I changed the model. Now it works more like a code review: you explicitly run it, it analyzes a snapshot, and gives you a stable set of feedback. That one change made the whole thing feel calmer and more useful. The new review system is going live shortly. There are several kinds of reviewers which you can enable/disable at will: - Granularity: Flags scope items that are too big or small. - Duplicate: Detects scope items that overlap with each other. - Ambiguity: Looks for scope or statements (assumptions/out of scope) that are unclear or vague. - Question Coverage: Flags open questions if they're answerable from the projects context - Missing Features: Identifies if there are features in the context missing from the scope. Big reminder for me: the UX of *when* AI speaks matters just as much as *what* it says. Curious if others have run into this building AI features.

ScopeSnap now has builtin Proposals and Statements of Work I really felt that ScopeSnap was "half an app" when it generated a good looking scope but dropped it on your lap leaving users to go the rest of the way alone. The logical next step is to use that information to create Proposals and SoWs. You can define templated documents at the organization level which are reusable across your projects and clients. At the project level you pick which template to use as a base for creating your documents. Come check it out, feedback appreciated!