# Keep required coverage inside a portfolio choice

Illustrative planning brief; no automatic product import.

Synthetic planning case: A ten-hour toy portfolio must include four hours of maintenance. Maintenance gives three declared points; growth A needs six hours for ten points and growth B four for eight.

## Decision

Maintenance plus growth A fits ten hours for thirteen points. Growth A plus B has eighteen points but violates the stated maintenance obligation, so it is ineligible.

## Owned work

- Verify the coverage obligation
  - Owner role: Operating owner
  - Acceptance evidence: Four maintenance hours are a governing requirement for this decision.
- Filter feasible bundles
  - Owner role: Planner
  - Acceptance evidence: Capacity and maintenance coverage are checked independently.
- Record the eligible preference choice
  - Owner role: Decision owner
  - Acceptance evidence: The selected thirteen-point bundle preserves the required maintenance work.

## Workflow

1. Verify the coverage obligation. Check: Four maintenance hours are a governing requirement for this decision.
2. Filter feasible bundles. Check: Capacity and maintenance coverage are checked independently.
3. Record the eligible preference choice. Check: The selected thirteen-point bundle preserves the required maintenance work.

## Judgment

Neither the coverage amount nor the point scale is a benchmark. Missing task dependencies could change feasibility.


## Filled manual planning note

Maintenance plus growth A fits ten hours for thirteen points. Growth A plus B has eighteen points but violates the stated maintenance obligation, so it is ineligible. The hard coverage rule requires the maintenance task. Among the displayed eligible bundles, thirteen exceeds eleven; the eighteen-point bundle is outside the allowed set. Neither the coverage amount nor the point scale is a benchmark. Missing task dependencies could change feasibility.


## Workflow questions

### Can extra growth points compensate for missing maintenance?

Not under this hard coverage rule. A requirement change needs its own decision.

### Is four hours a recommended maintenance allocation?

No. It is the stated obligation in this invented example.

## Product connection

Use the owned checks and downloaded brief to discuss this planning decision alongside your TeamBoostAI tasks. Confirm available fields, roles and account features separately. The example is manual; it does not calculate live analytics, create work or run an experiment in the product.

Confirm account availability before adopting this manual outline.

## Original worked case

Synthetic records, manual planning only. No account import or live analytics.

### Inspect the invented case records

Bundle | Hours | Declared points | Maintenance coverage
--- | --- | --- | ---
Maintenance + growth A | 10 | 13 | Four hours: meets
Growth A + growth B | 10 | 18 | Zero: fails
Maintenance + growth B | 8 | 11 | Four hours: meets

### Reasoning

The hard coverage rule requires the maintenance task. Among the displayed eligible bundles, thirteen exceeds eleven; the eighteen-point bundle is outside the allowed set.

### Bounded result

Maintenance plus growth A fits ten hours for thirteen points. Growth A plus B has eighteen points but violates the stated maintenance obligation, so it is ineligible.

### Distinct decision

This models a mandatory category obligation inside a capacity-bounded portfolio.

### Limits

Neither the coverage amount nor the point scale is a benchmark. Missing task dependencies could change feasibility.

### Definitions and method context

- Original worked-case definitions — Definitions, policy choices, records and calculations are authored for this worksheet. No external standard, statistical validation or live product measurement is claimed.