CasperWasp
Get started
How it works · Collaboration

Approval workflows

Route documents through review chains so the right people sign off before export, share, or signature requests.

Collaboration

Overview

Many teams “approve” documents by emoji in chat. That fails audits, fails handoffs, and fails when someone asks who blessed the customer-facing terms. CasperWasp approval workflows turn review into a structured chain inside Document Studio: submit a version, route to approvers, track what remains open.

Approvals work best on top of comment hygiene and version compare. Resolve blocker threads first, save a numbered submitted version, then start the workflow. Approvers should spend time on residual risk and deltas — not rediscovering issues that editors already knew about.

Eligible plans include workflow capabilities as part of the collaboration surface. The marketplace still meters AI separately via tokens; approvals themselves are process, not generation. Editing and export remain free. Failed AI calls elsewhere in the draft process use zero tokens.

When approvals clear, teams typically move to watermarked external shares or signature requests. The workflow is the internal gate; signatures are the execution gate. Keeping both in one organisation trail beats signing a PDF that no longer matches the approved draft.

In depth

Understanding Approval workflows

How the feature works in practice inside the CasperWasp marketplace — and how it connects to the rest of your work.

Designing a review chain that people respect

Map approvers to real authority: legal for contracts, finance for pricing, brand for customer narratives, ops for SOPs. Too many approvers create deadlock; too few create rubber stamps. Start with the minimum chain that matches risk.

Sequence matters. If legal must bless language before finance confirms numbers, encode that order. Parallel approvals work for independent sections; serial approvals work for dependent risk.

Make “ready for approval” a definition, not a feeling: unresolved high-severity comments = not ready; no submitted version = not ready; placeholder text still visible = not ready. Workflows cannot fix a draft that was submitted early.

Owners and admins may configure organisation practices; editors prepare the work. Spending gates stay separate — approvals do not require every editor to hold billing power.

What approvers should actually review

Lead with version compare against the last approved or submitted state. Read the diff, then sample surrounding context. Full linear reads are for first principles reviews, not every revision loop.

Check open comments and any AI-assisted sections that claim facts. Pair PDF Intelligence citations when the pack asserts something from a source filing. Approvers own judgment; AI does not.

Record decisions in the workflow status and, when useful, in a short comment on the document. Future auditors should not need Slack archaeology to learn why an exception was granted.

If changes are required, send clear actionable feedback. Editors revise, save a new version, and resubmit. Avoid side-channel edits that bypass the chain.

Approvals in the wider CasperWasp pack

Document Studio approvals often sit beside Design Studio brand assets. Confirm the approved letterhead or stamp version is the one embedded or referenced before you call the pack done.

After internal approval, use watermarked share links for external soft review, then signature requests for execution. Skipping internal approval before signatures creates avoidable legal risk.

Platform audit trail covers AI usage; approval status covers human gates. Finance may care about tokens consumed during drafting; compliance cares who approved. Both matter; they answer different questions.

There is no separate approvals SaaS to buy for this flow — it lives in the CasperWasp marketplace collaboration feature set for Document Studio on eligible plans.

How it works

Step by step

A practical walkthrough of approval workflows in the CasperWasp marketplace.

  1. 01

    Finish the draft and resolve blocker comments

    Close or explicitly defer open threads. Approval should not be the first time someone sees a known issue.

  2. 02

    Save a numbered submitted version

    Create a restore and compare point that represents what you are asking people to approve.

  3. 03

    Confirm plan eligibility and approver list

    On plans that include workflows, select the review chain that matches risk — legal, finance, brand, or ops as needed.

  4. 04

    Start the approval workflow

    Route the document so approvers receive a clear request tied to the submitted version.

  5. 05

    Approvers review diffs and residual risk

    Compare versions, check comments, validate sensitive claims, and approve or request changes with specifics.

  6. 06

    Revise and resubmit if needed

    Editors address feedback, checkpoint a new version, and continue the chain until status is clear.

  7. 07

    Proceed to share or signatures

    Only after approval: watermarked external links for soft review, or signature requests for execution.

  8. 08

    Export the approved artifact

    Export freely for filing or delivery. Keep the approved version identity clear in your organisation practice.

When

When to use this

  • Customer contracts and MSAs that need legal and commercial sign-off
  • Policies and SOPs that require ops and compliance gates
  • Pricing proposals that need finance approval before they go out
  • Agency deliverables that need creative director approval before client send
  • Board or investor updates with leadership review
  • Any pack that will be signed or shared externally afterward
  • Revision loops where you need a formal resubmit rather than informal chat approval
  • Teams replacing emoji-in-Slack “LGTM” with an auditable status
Who

Who it is for

  • Legal and compliance reviewers who must leave a clear gate
  • Finance partners approving commercial terms
  • Editors who need a defined “submitted” state
  • Agency leads controlling quality before client exposure
  • Founders instituting lightweight governance without heavy PMO tooling
  • Admins configuring organisation review practices on eligible plans
  • Anyone who will request signatures next and needs internal blessing first
Examples

Real workflows

Concrete jobs teams run with this feature — not abstract capability lists.

An MSA: editor resolves comments, saves v18, routes to counsel then CRO; compare shows only the liability clause changed; both approve; signatures follow.
A retail returns SOP: ops manager requests changes on two steps; editor revises; second approval clears; PDF export goes to stores.
A services proposal: finance rejects a discount table; editor updates numbers; resubmit approved; watermarked link sent to the prospect.
An agency brand guide narrative: creative director approval required before client workshop; workflow blocks early send.
A security policy update: compliance and IT approve in sequence; audit later reconstructs who signed off and which version.
A bilingual customer addendum: legal approves English; localisation owner approves translation; then signature request.
Included

What you get

  • Structured review chains on eligible plans
  • Clear submitted state paired with version history
  • Status tracking for what is approved vs still open
  • Change-focused review via version compare
  • Audit-friendly human gate alongside AI usage logs
  • Natural handoff to watermarked shares and signatures
  • Role-aware participation inside organisations
  • Separation of spending gates from review gates
  • No token cost for routing or approving itself
  • Free editing during revision loops
  • Free export of approved artifacts
  • Marketplace-native collaboration in Document Studio
Tips

Do it well

Define “ready for approval” as unresolved blockers = zero.
Always submit from a numbered version.
Keep chains short; add approvers only when risk demands it.
Approvers should read diffs first.
Do not start signatures before internal approval clears.
Record exceptions in comments for future readers.
Resubmit cleanly instead of side-channel edits.
Align Design Studio assets before calling the pack approved.
Pitfalls

Common mistakes to avoid

The shortcuts that waste time or produce weak deliverables.

  • Routing while high-severity comment threads are still open
  • Approving without comparing to the previous version
  • Building a twelve-person chain that never completes
  • Using chat emoji as the real approval while the workflow is ignored
  • Signing externally before the internal workflow finishes
  • Letting editors with no authority permanently bypass the chain
  • Forgetting to checkpoint a new version after requested changes
FAQ

Common questions

Related

More how-it-works pages

Collaboration

Signature requests

Collect signatures in the same organisation trail as the document — without bouncing to a disconnected e-sign silo.

Collaboration

Version history

Numbered saves with compare and one-click restore so risky edits and AI rewrites never erase your last good draft.

Document Studio

Document Studio

Draft, refine, collaborate on, and export business documents with AI beside the cursor inside CasperWasp.

Collaboration

Threaded comments

Attach feedback to exact passages, @mention teammates, and resolve threads without leaving Document Studio.

Collaboration

Watermarked share links

Share read-only links with optional watermarks so external reviewers see drafts without mistaking them for finals.

Open Document Studio

Part of the CasperWasp marketplace — documents and design under one subscription.

Open Document StudioAll features

Try the CasperWasp marketplace

Create an account and use Document Studio and Design Studio from one subscription — write documents, analyse PDFs, and generate brand assets with transparent AI usage.

Create an accountSee pricing

Plans from ₹300/month · Cancel anytime