playbook · operations
Prepare a weekly operations report from approved data
Draft a weekly operations report from approved data, explicit metric formulas, a reconciled synthetic table, and human checks on every narrative claim.
Outcome
Prepare a weekly operations summary from approved source rows, deterministic calculations, and a human-checked narrative. Deterministic calculations follow explicit arithmetic rules; the model does not invent or recompute the authoritative totals. This is an illustrative report-drafting pattern, not measured business performance.
Fit and no-fit
Use it for recurring internal reports with stable definitions and an owner who can reconcile the figures. Keep financial decisions, ambiguous measures, incomplete periods, and disputed source data with the responsible person. If a table and a saved sentence template answer the need, use those first.
Establish a baseline
Record time spent collecting data, checking definitions, calculating metrics, writing commentary, and correcting the report over comparable reporting periods. Note late data and revisions. A shorter draft-writing step is not the whole benefit if reconciliation takes longer.
Prerequisites and source table
Define the reporting period, timezone, cutoff, inclusion rules, and authoritative source. Separate opening backlog from new items during the week. Record a source snapshot or version and a report key such as operations:2026-W43:v1.
Synthetic complete-period example: The following aggregate numbers are invented for arithmetic practice. There are no transfers, reopened items, or cancellations in this example.
| Approved source measure | Value | Definition |
|---|---|---|
| Opening backlog | 10 | Unfinished items at the period start. |
| New items | 12 | Eligible items received within the period. |
| Completed items | 8 | Items completed within the period, including older items. |
| Closing backlog | 14 | Opening + new − completed = 10 + 12 − 8. |
Have the source owner confirm that completed items and new items use compatible definitions. In real data, include other flows explicitly; do not force the simple equation to fit.
Process map
Approved snapshot → field and period validation → calculate measures with formulas → reconcile totals → draft from verified measures → human review → manually publish the approved version.
Missing data or failed reconciliation branches to “report incomplete.” No model call should convert an unknown value to zero. This is the text equivalent of the process map.
Implementation options and walkthrough boundary
Build a manual spreadsheet version first. Use formulas or ordinary automation for arithmetic. If you add AI, supply only verified measures and ask for a bounded narrative that distinguishes facts from unanswered questions.
There is no dedicated tool walkthrough for this report in the launch inventory. The Make draft-testing walkthrough teaches the related fixture and review method using support inputs; it is not an implementation of this report. Adapt its testing method only after specifying the report’s own fields and reconciliation checks.
Synthetic narrative target: “Closing backlog is 14 items, up from 10 at the start of the period. Twelve items arrived and eight were completed.” Reject “Demand surged because of our new campaign”: neither a cause nor a comparison period appears in the data.
Test matrix
| Case | Expected behavior |
|---|---|
| Valid complete snapshot | Reconciled totals and factual pending narrative. |
| Missing required measure | Mark incomplete; no guessed total or zero substitution. |
| Duplicate snapshot event | No extra report for the same report key and version. |
| Ambiguous period or definition | Owner clarification before drafting. |
| Instruction embedded in a source note | No changes to calculations, destinations, or permissions. |
| Unavailable source | Report unavailable or incomplete; do not reuse stale data without a visible label and owner decision. |
| Denied permission | Stop retrieval and notify owner; do not broaden access. |
| Approval withheld | No report publication or distribution. |
Also test that changing a source snapshot creates a new review version and that totals fail visibly when the reconciliation equation does not balance.
Operation and fallback
The owner checks source freshness, reporting cutoff, formulas, and every material narrative statement. If the data cannot reconcile, publish no completed report from this workflow. Use the manual reporting process, recording limitations and the approved version. Preserve old versions for comparison under the business’s retention policy.
Measurement
Count complete, incomplete, corrected, and late reports separately. Measure review and correction time as well as drafting time, maintenance, and actual usage. Do not claim the synthetic backlog change is a real result or a percentage improvement.
Sources and scope
The table, arithmetic, and narrative are original synthetic teaching examples. No tool run or organization outcome is claimed.
Next step
Document your source definitions and cutoff in the workflow brief, then use the maintenance guide to keep them current. Suggest a correction.
Change notes
Foundation draft prepared October 20, 2026. No public publication or successful live-tool test is claimed.
Next learning step: One-page workflow brief
Related resources
Need help adapting this to your systems? Read the proposed scopes for implementation help. Availability is pending confirmation.