Request-to-invoice walkthrough

See how Flopinio handles client work from intake to invoice.

Inside the Acme Research Demo sandbox, follow one representative Northstar Health Labs client request through External Inbox, delivery, approval-aware execution, tracked evidence, and invoice preparation. These are deterministic sample records—not live customer data.

Start walkthrough Start with a sandbox

1External Inbox

2Request

3Project delivery

4Approval & time

5Invoice evidence

Step 1 of 4

External Inbox to urgent request

A connected Gmail item enters External Inbox with its source intact. The operator reviews the client, project, urgency, and suggested destination before creating work.

Why it matters

Incoming context stays reviewable instead of silently becoming a task with missing details.

Operator cue: Confirm the client signal and choose what record should exist.
System effect: Source evidence remains linked when the item becomes a request.

Acme Research Demo

External Inbox

Sandbox data

Gmail · received today at 09:12

Urgent

Northstar needs rollback guidance before the 3 PM steering call

The appointment-confirmation flow is blocked. Preserve the client message, confirm the affected launch project, and route it for review.

Suggested record

Request

Client

Northstar Health Labs

Project

Patient portal launch

Step 2 of 4

Project hub & active work

The accepted request is connected to the Northstar launch project and a priority task, alongside current health and delivery evidence.

Why it matters

The project becomes a live execution hub instead of a passive folder.

Operator cue: See the blocker, owner gap, and next task together.
System effect: The request, project, task, and note retain their relationships.

Acme Research Demo

Delivery

Sandbox data

Project health · needs attention

Northstar patient portal launch

Same-day coordination is active and the rollback checklist still has owner gaps.

Priority task

Close rollback-checklist ownership gaps

Linked to the originating request, delivery note, and launch project.

Step 3 of 4

Grounded, approval-aware execution

Tracked time and a grounded review use the same linked delivery context. The suggested client action remains staged until a person approves it.

Why it matters

Execution help is useful only when its evidence, state, and write boundary stay inspectable.

Operator cue: Review the evidence and decide whether the client-facing action should proceed.
System effect: Run history and approval state remain attached to the work.

Acme Research Demo

Execution

Sandbox data

Tracked time

01:18:42

Northstar launch coordination

Grounded review · succeeded

Fallback release plan prepared from linked evidence

The suggested client update uses the request, task, delivery note, and tracked time. Sending remains an explicit approval step.

Pending human approval

Step 4 of 4

Invoice & billing evidence

Tracked launch work becomes invoice evidence without losing the tasks, notes, or request that explain it.

Why it matters

Billing is more reliable when it follows delivery evidence instead of month-end reconstruction.

Operator cue: Review included work and confirm the evidence before sending.
System effect: Time, invoice preparation, and delivery provenance remain connected.

Acme Research Demo

Billing

Sandbox data

Draft invoice evidence

Northstar Health Labs · July

Portal launch coordination12.5h

Rollback preparation4.0h

Evidence posture

16.5h

Time is linked to tasks, notes, and the originating request. Final invoice review and send remain explicit.

Run the same flow with your own client work.

Start with a sandbox workspace, inspect the records, then decide when to bring in live work.

Start free Back to homepage