Design reviewable workflows before execution.
Workflow docs help builders turn repeated model work into named steps with context, model lanes, approvals, evidence, and clear execution boundaries. The page teaches how to design repeatable model work that remains understandable before, during, and after it runs. It emphasizes named steps, review boundaries, and approvals instead of vague automation language.
A guide to repeatable model work.
Workflow Docs explain how to move from a useful prompt to a repeatable process. The focus is not unattended automation. The focus is structure: define the inputs, name the steps, choose model lanes, simulate the run, add approval paths, keep evidence, and preserve workspace history so the workflow can be reviewed and improved. That is important because many useful workflows begin as prompts and then grow into team systems. The docs help builders add structure, dry runs, evidence, and control without pretending every process should become unattended.
- Design workflows as named steps with clear inputs and outputs. Named steps help teams explain the workflow to each other.
- Use approval paths before sensitive or state-changing movement. Dry-run thinking matters because review often comes before execution.
- Keep evidence and receipts attached to every important step. Approval boundaries matter because repeated work can still be consequential.
- Route steps through flagship, open, or local lanes where supported. Evidence matters because process quality depends on what survives the run.
- Connect workflow concepts to Ethen Workflow, Cortex, Approvals, and Evidence. Lane concepts matter because not every step needs the same model path.
Workflow documentation capabilities
The docs provide a practical structure for designing workflows that stay understandable after they run. The workflow docs are meant to give builders a practical structure they can reuse and improve.
Workflow anatomy
Explain inputs, steps, outputs, review points, approval gates, and evidence records. Input design matters because unclear inputs make weak workflows.
Step design
Break work into read, draft, review, verify, approve, and execution-oriented boundaries. Step design matters because repeated work should have a readable shape.
Model-lane guidance
Use flagship, open, and local lanes based on reasoning need, volume, sensitivity, and supported configuration. Lane design matters because model choice can vary by stage.
Simulation
Run or describe dry-run behavior so users can inspect the workflow before sensitive movement. Approval design matters because sensitive steps need human ownership.
Approval paths
Add human gates before state-changing steps, connected-system actions, or private-context movement. Evidence design matters because review should not disappear after a run.
Evidence habits
Keep receipts, route choices, approval records, and review notes attached to the workflow history. Connected-context design matters where support exists and boundaries need to stay visible.
How to design a workflow
A reviewable workflow is a process users can understand before and after it runs. Good workflow docs should help builders create systems they can still trust a month later.
Define the recurring task
Start with a task that repeats often enough to deserve structure. Start by naming the repeated job in plain language.
Name the inputs
List the files, prompts, connected context, user decisions, and model lanes the workflow may need. Define the inputs, outputs, and stages before adding action.
Break the steps apart
Separate research, drafting, verification, approval, and execution-oriented movement. Choose lane, context, and evidence expectations for each step.
Add review gates
Place approval paths before sensitive, external, or state-changing steps. Add approvals where consequences change.
Keep receipts
Attach evidence, outputs, approval decisions, and workspace history so future runs can improve. Review the dry-run shape before relying on execution behavior.
Visibility and control
Workflow docs should help users design processes that remain visible, not hidden behind a button. The more often a workflow runs, the more important it is that the process remains legible.
Named steps
Users can see the workflow structure before the run begins. Visible stages make workflows easier to maintain.
Approval gates
Sensitive movement pauses for human review. Approval visibility helps teams keep ownership of important steps.
Evidence records
Outputs and decisions stay attached to the workflow. Evidence visibility helps teams improve the process over time.
Model-lane choices
Each step can show which lane handled the work where supported. Boundary visibility matters because repeated work often touches many systems.
What this page represents
This page explains how to design reviewable workflows in Ethen. It focuses on steps, approvals, evidence, and visible boundaries while exact runtime behavior belongs in product documentation. The page stays at the level of design guidance and review posture. Exact runtime behavior belongs in verified product documentation where available.