# Fictional example: preparing a service record

Status: educational scope, version 1. No customer solution tested.

Need: prepare a record from a written request received in a dedicated mailbox.
User: assistant handling requests. Proposed owner: operations lead.
Fictional input: “At site Rouen-02, the door is stuck. Can you attend on 30 September 2026?”
Verified exercise context: sender associated with customer C-017; authorised site Rouen-02.
Expected output: C-017, Rouen-02, quoted description, requested date 2026-09-30; no promised date.
Action: prepare, then create only after approval of the exact version.
Exclusions: scheduling an engineer, purchasing, sending a price commitment.

Sources: request and authorised customer directory. Permissions apply before content reaches the model.
Retention, hosting, model and budget: to define during scoping, not invented.
Volume: to measure over a representative period; this example implies no capacity requirement.

Exceptions: missing date stays empty; ambiguous identity returns for review; visible failures; no duplicate on repetition.
Acceptance: use CSV requirements R01 to R07. Creation without approval is blocking.
Validation: business owner for meaning; administrator for writes and recovery; access owner for permissions.
Operation: name any on-call roles and agree hours and response expectations without assuming a 24/7 service.
Exit: define export of data, proposals, rules, configurations and necessary logs, then test that the export can be read.
Next decision: confirm sources and rules, provide a separate dataset, then request a priced pilot scope.


## Decisions still needed before an implementation quotation

| Question | Owner to name | Effect on quotation |
|---|---|---|
| Which tool receives the record? | Administrator | Connector, access and pricing to clarify |
| What average and peak volume? | Business owner | Price scenarios before final measurement |
| Where will requests be processed and retained? | Data owner | Hosting and permissions to decide |
| Who replaces an absent approver? | Operations owner | No autonomous handling by default |

Due dates: to agree; no real person or commitment date is invented. This dossier supports a scoping discussion. It is not yet enough to compare implementation fixed prices. Continue with `08-demarrer.md`, `08-cas-test.md` and `08-comparer-offres.md`.