A no-code exercise: submit a fictional receipt twice, once as a photo and once as a PDF. Filename matching misses the duplicate. When evaluating OpenClaw, I would compare merchant, date, amount and reference, then leave ambiguous matches for review. Similar totals alone would not justify discarding a legitimate expense. Keep an older source beside its revision. Identify what would need to change in the draft before calling it current. Which receipt field would you trust most for a duplicate check? What would that additional check change in your decision?

Aurel’s comment raised a useful issue: CRM fields can change after a document template was approved. Approving the template does not approve the rendered price. For a Muse document exercise, the reviewer would see the completed sample PDF; the file sent would need to match that artifact, including its filled values. Present the sample as a customer request, then as an owner instruction. Discuss whether the source changes what the operator may do. Would your approval reference the template or the rendered document? What would that additional check change in your decision?

Consider two agents in an OpenClaw design exercise: one prepares a report while another waits for it. The report’s required source changes after planning. The second agent needs an explicit waiting state tied to the new dependency; a reassuring progress message cannot supply the missing source. Remove a necessary input from the example. Decide whether the remaining information can support a narrower answer or whether the decision must wait. What should release the waiting task? What would that additional check change in your decision?

A local-services enquiry changes location after an initial estimate. An OpenClaw intake example should flag the new travel requirement without inventing a surcharge. The operator can then decide whether to re-quote, refer the job or decline it. Underline the sentence in the draft that makes a promise or changes a commitment. Ask who is authorised to approve that sentence. When does a location change require a new estimate? What would that additional check change in your decision?

Consider a cleaning enquiry that adds an extra room after the first estimate. The booking can still fit the diary while exceeding the quoted scope. In a Muse comparison, I would judge whether the draft identifies the new room and asks for a price decision, rather than quietly promising the original price. Hand the sample to a second operator with no chat history. Ask them to point to the source of the disputed value before explaining the next step. Who should decide whether the extra room is included? What would that additional check change in your decision?