{
  "example_kind": "invented job and manual worksheet",
  "slug": "blocked-task-notification-wording",
  "title": "Route a blocker request to someone who can actually answer",
  "layout": "decision",
  "story": "When a blocker alert reaches people who cannot decide, I want an acknowledged route to the accepting owner so a specific answer returns instead of another broadcast.",
  "problem": "The export team broadcasts a missing cancelled-order policy to the data team. The data team can retrieve files but cannot decide the customer rule. Nobody acknowledges ownership of the requested response.",
  "symptoms": [
    "A technically relevant team is mistaken for the authorized decision owner.",
    "Posting the request is treated as proof someone received and owns it.",
    "An unanswered response window ends with another broadcast rather than a named reroute."
  ],
  "failed_workaround": "Repeating the same blocked alert to more people increases noise while leaving the decision unspecified.",
  "before": "Blocked on data. Can someone help urgently?",
  "after": "Routing request: the cancelled-order include/exclude rule needs the receiving lead, not the data retrieval team. Coordinator: confirm who owns this customer-rule decision and ask them to acknowledge the request. The receiving owner should return the chosen rule by the Wednesday review window, or a revised decision time. If ownership is declined or no acknowledgement arrives, the coordinator must resolve the correct receiving route; do not broadcast the same alert again. Keep export review open until an authorized rule is recorded.",
  "success_check": "A coordinator can distinguish a sent alert, acknowledged response owner and returned authorized answer, with a named rerouting action when ownership is declined.",
  "choices": [
    [
      "A policy decision is missing",
      "Ask the accepting owner to choose",
      "An engineer cannot resolve a business rule by guessing."
    ],
    [
      "A file or access prerequisite is missing",
      "Request that prerequisite from its owner",
      "Use the actual condition rather than the policy template."
    ],
    [
      "The recipient cannot decide",
      "Resolve the correct route",
      "Being mentioned does not grant authority."
    ]
  ],
  "route": [
    {
      "label": "Make the blocker inspectable",
      "capability": "task-record",
      "action": "Keep the affected export task and current blocking reason together.",
      "human_check": "Verify that this is still the actual missing condition."
    },
    {
      "label": "Attach the decision request",
      "capability": "task-comment",
      "action": "Record the proposed receiving owner, ask for acknowledgement and agree the return window through your approved communication route.",
      "human_check": "Confirm that a person accepted the response responsibility; posting a note is not proof of delivery."
    },
    {
      "label": "Carry the unresolved ask into reporting",
      "capability": "daily-report",
      "action": "Keep the task-linked ask visible until the rule is returned.",
      "human_check": "The response must state the chosen rule before implementation resumes."
    }
  ],
  "editor": {
    "heading": "Prepare a decision request",
    "fields": [
      {
        "key": "input",
        "label": "Missing input or decision",
        "example": "Cancelled orders: include or exclude?",
        "help": "Ask a question the recipient can settle."
      },
      {
        "key": "impact",
        "label": "Affected outcome",
        "example": "Customer export review cannot proceed",
        "help": "Explain why the answer matters."
      },
      {
        "key": "owner",
        "label": "Proposed owner and acknowledgement",
        "example": "Receiving lead; coordinator confirms acceptance of the decision request",
        "help": "Record who can decide and whether that responsibility has been acknowledged."
      },
      {
        "key": "when",
        "label": "Useful response window",
        "example": "Wednesday review window",
        "help": "Offer a real checkpoint, not invented urgency."
      },
      {
        "key": "fallback",
        "label": "Return or rerouting action",
        "example": "Coordinator resolves the receiving route if declined or unacknowledged; authorized rule returns to export task",
        "help": "Distinguish a returned answer from an unanswered broadcast."
      }
    ],
    "template": "Routed decision request\nQuestion: {input}.\nAffected outcome: {impact}.\nProposed owner and acknowledgement: {owner}.\nDecision-return window: {when}.\nReturn or rerouting action: {fallback}.\nA sent or posted request is not an acknowledged response commitment; keep the affected work open until an authorized answer returns."
  },
  "limitations": "The example is invented. Task notes do not ensure that a notification is delivered or that the recipient is authorized.",
  "tasks": [
    [
      "Resolve the authorized route",
      "Coordinator",
      "The data team distinguishes retrieval responsibility from the receiving lead’s policy authority."
    ],
    [
      "Obtain a response commitment",
      "Receiving lead",
      "Acknowledgement names the owner and decision-return window, or explicitly declines ownership."
    ],
    [
      "Return or reroute the request",
      "Coordinator",
      "The answer reaches the affected task, or an unanswered/declined request has a named rerouting action."
    ]
  ],
  "faqs": [
    [
      "Should every blocker use an urgent label?",
      "No. Explain its actual impact and useful response time; urgency alone is not an action."
    ],
    [
      "What if the recipient is not the decision owner?",
      "Ask for the correct route instead of assuming a copied person has authority."
    ],
    [
      "Will TeamBoost send the request for me?",
      "This page drafts text only. Put the reviewed request in your available task/comment/report workflow and use your approved communication route. No automatic notification delivery is established here."
    ]
  ]
}