# Use one original procedure and five answer checks

OPS-K01 is a fictional administrative request handoff. Use permitted test content and participants. The example does not authorize a purchase, customer message or account change. Its current reference and expected results let the evaluator judge whether an answer is supported before trying a product.

This is portable sample text and a blank evaluation record, not a native Guru template, connector or account export.

- **Current reference:** OPS-K01 · revision B · Fictional example
- **Maintaining owner:** Operations coordinator
- **Start condition:** A sample request has a contact reference and defined scope.
- **Completion condition:** The named receiver records receipt of the next action.
- **Change from A:** Earlier revision A named a receiver; B adds explicit receipt before closure.

1. Check the sample request reference, contact and scope. Leave missing information unresolved until the coordinating owner supplies it.
2. Name the receiver and one concrete next action with its agreed follow-up point.
3. Record the receiver's explicit receipt. If the receiver is unavailable, keep the handoff open and route the question to the operations coordinator.
4. Check contact, scope, receiver, next action and receipt before recording completion. Retain the particular request record separately from these reusable instructions.

## Evaluation context

- **Product and proposed package:** __________
- **Configured sources and filters:** __________
- **Permission model and approved test readers:** __________
- **Current instruction and maintaining owner:** __________
- **Verification/quality rules and date:** __________
- **Evaluator and observation window:** __________
- **Expected change and source reference:** __________
- **Private evidence location:** __________

For each question, record the actual answer or located instruction, cited source/version, access context and underlying task record where relevant. Both products start Not tested. The expected checks are teaching criteria, not claims that either product passed. Keep private evidence and account details in their authorized systems.

## Q1. Which OPS-K01 revision governs the current handoff?

Expected evidence: Identify B and cite the designated current instructions; do not select A merely because an older copy is easier to find.

- Guru: Not tested
- SOPFlow: Not tested
- Observed answer/instruction and citation: __________
- Reader access and relevant task record: __________
- Gap, resolving owner and follow-up: __________

## Q2. The receiver is unavailable. Can I close the handoff?

Expected evidence: Explain the open handoff, coordinating owner and follow-up from the current exception. Do not invent receipt.

- Guru: Not tested
- SOPFlow: Not tested
- Observed answer/instruction and citation: __________
- Reader access and relevant task record: __________
- Gap, resolving owner and follow-up: __________

## Q3. After an agreed instruction changes, which source now applies?

Expected evidence: Prepare the change and expected answer first. Inspect the source reference, configured refresh/quality behavior and any stale answer; record the observed delay without assuming immediate propagation.

- Guru: Not tested
- SOPFlow: Not tested
- Observed answer/instruction and citation: __________
- Reader access and relevant task record: __________
- Gap, resolving owner and follow-up: __________

## Q4. Can this reader retrieve a restricted test note?

Expected evidence: Use an approved sample note and a private marker not present in the question or public packet. An unauthorized test reader must not receive its content; check the authorized reader separately.

- Guru: Not tested
- SOPFlow: Not tested
- Observed answer/instruction and citation: __________
- Reader access and relevant task record: __________
- Gap, resolving owner and follow-up: __________

## Q5. Is request DEMO-308 complete?

Expected evidence: The reusable procedure alone cannot establish completion. If permitted task evidence is supplied, inspect its citation, receipt and scope rather than assuming a search answer or procedure view proves the work.

- Guru: Not tested
- SOPFlow: Not tested
- Observed answer/instruction and citation: __________
- Reader access and relevant task record: __________
- Gap, resolving owner and follow-up: __________

https://sopflow.io/compare/sopflow-vs-guru/