# Private-workspace demand-validation protocol

Updated 2026-07-23.

## Purpose

Is there a recurring user need that the current local project file cannot solve?

## Who uses this

Product lead and research/privacy reviewers

## Records to gather

Observed local workflow attempts; specific collaboration failures; proposed service/data requirements; current product boundaries.

## Steps

1. Read Current experiment and Jobs being tested, keeping the local workflow as the initial case.
2. Record evidence of a cloud need from actual repeated tasks rather than enthusiasm alone.
3. Assess every future workspace launch gate before defining a minimum persistent release.

## Key terms

- **Local project file**: A user-controlled export kept on the user’s device.
- **Cloud need**: An evidenced recurring job requiring capabilities beyond the current local file.
- **Launch gate**: A required product, security, governance, or operational condition before intake.

## Fictional example

Fictional example: Two reviewers cannot reconcile versions of a coded local file; document the specific handoff failure and test whether a clearer export process resolves it.

## Next action

Document one verified unmet job and its required data/authority before proposing new infrastructure.

## Limits

This design protocol does not create accounts, uploads, shared storage, consent, or permission to collect project files.

## AI coaching

Help me complete this DenQAI file using the context below. Explain the supplied fictional example first, then ask one question at a time about my permitted fictional or aggregate, non-identifying inputs. Treat missing values as unknown, not zero. Keep example values separate from my case. Do not invent records, source verification, contract terms or professional conclusions. Identify the missing evidence and responsible reviewer before the next action.

File: Private-workspace demand-validation protocol (Markdown).

Question: Is there a recurring user need that the current local project file cannot solve?

Records to gather: Observed local workflow attempts; specific collaboration failures; proposed service/data requirements; current product boundaries.

Fields or sheets: DenQAI private-workspace demand-validation protocol; Purpose; Current experiment; Jobs being tested; Evidence of a cloud need; Launch gates for any future persistent workspace; Minimum first release if the gates clear; Framework references.

Key terms:
Local project file: A user-controlled export kept on the user’s device.
Cloud need: An evidenced recurring job requiring capabilities beyond the current local file.
Launch gate: A required product, security, governance, or operational condition before intake.

Steps:
1. Read Current experiment and Jobs being tested, keeping the local workflow as the initial case.
2. Record evidence of a cloud need from actual repeated tasks rather than enthusiasm alone.
3. Assess every future workspace launch gate before defining a minimum persistent release.

Fictional example:
Fictional example: Two reviewers cannot reconcile versions of a coded local file; document the specific handoff failure and test whether a clearer export process resolves it.

Limits:
This design protocol does not create accounts, uploads, shared storage, consent, or permission to collect project files.

Next action: Document one verified unmet job and its required data/authority before proposing new infrastructure.

## AI review

Review my permitted fictional or aggregate, non-identifying draft against the DenQAI file context below. Check the actual fields, units, periods, evidence and unresolved contradictions. Use arithmetic only where the stated model supports it; a CSV has no embedded formulas. Keep missing values unknown and separate facts, assumptions and the fictional example. Return specific corrections, questions for the responsible reviewer and the next action; do not invent professional approval.

File: Private-workspace demand-validation protocol (Markdown).

Question: Is there a recurring user need that the current local project file cannot solve?

Records to gather: Observed local workflow attempts; specific collaboration failures; proposed service/data requirements; current product boundaries.

Fields or sheets: DenQAI private-workspace demand-validation protocol; Purpose; Current experiment; Jobs being tested; Evidence of a cloud need; Launch gates for any future persistent workspace; Minimum first release if the gates clear; Framework references.

Key terms:
Local project file: A user-controlled export kept on the user’s device.
Cloud need: An evidenced recurring job requiring capabilities beyond the current local file.
Launch gate: A required product, security, governance, or operational condition before intake.

Steps:
1. Read Current experiment and Jobs being tested, keeping the local workflow as the initial case.
2. Record evidence of a cloud need from actual repeated tasks rather than enthusiasm alone.
3. Assess every future workspace launch gate before defining a minimum persistent release.

Fictional example:
Fictional example: Two reviewers cannot reconcile versions of a coded local file; document the specific handoff failure and test whether a clearer export process resolves it.

Limits:
This design protocol does not create accounts, uploads, shared storage, consent, or permission to collect project files.

Next action: Document one verified unmet job and its required data/authority before proposing new infrastructure.

## Related guide

[Open the related guide](https://denqai.com/workspace)