# Draft conditional forms from approved questions Canonical page: https://agents.paretoid.com/workflows/draft-conditional-forms-from-approved-questions/ Category: Intake & Booking Practice relevance: cross-practice. A general operational method. Review the stated tool and jurisdiction limits before use. Jurisdiction/provider scope: Map the firm’s approved questions and branches to a reviewable form specification. Status: Proposed / not tested. The public source describes the problem. Documentation supports only the stated method components; no result from this recipe has been verified. Verification: Source methods and reported problems have been reviewed. We have not run the adapted workflow. The sample below describes expected behavior on synthetic data, not a customer result. ## The problem Map the firm’s approved questions and branches to a reviewable form specification. Why it matters: An unclear branch can hide a required question or treat an unknown answer as no. A specification based only on approved questions lets the firm check each path before putting a form in front of prospective clients. ## Sources and evidence - pain: [Pain evidence: Public discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/LawFirmMarketing/comments/1wub11m/comment/pd1q2lg/) author comment 2026-09-30. The growing, multi-practice firm expressly requests conditional intake forms as part of escaping manual work. - method: [Method: Lawmatics form objects and conditional blocks](https://help.lawmatics.com/en/articles/10699854-create-objects-from-custom-forms-advanced-options) The guides describe field objects, reusable blocks, and conditional logic. General or form-only fields do not persist as reusable CRM fields. - method: [Method: Lawmatics form objects and conditional blocks · supporting guide 2](https://help.lawmatics.com/en/articles/10699895-standard-blocks-vs-relationship-blocks) Additional official capability reference. The complete adapted recipe has not been tested. Source checked: October 15, 2026. Pain accounts are self-reported. Documentation supports components; this adapted recipe and prompt have not been tested. Several CRM jobs come from the same firm discussion, not independent firms. ## Suggested approach Start when: Attorney-approved intake script changes 1. map only approved questions and branching conditions to persistent fields or form-only fields 2. Keep source references and report unknowns instead of filling gaps. 3. The responsible reviewer checks the report before any separately approved action. ## What you need - Existing authorized access to the correct source account and records; no new login, credentials, installation or permission grant is included. - Responsible lawyer/operations reviewer approves scope, definitions and any later action. - AI optional; use only approved minimized data and retain originals separately. - Use synthetic inputs first. Keep real data in firm-approved accounts and processing, with appropriate access, confidentiality and retention controls. Aliases alone do not anonymize records. Never paste credentials, API keys or unnecessary client details. ## How to use Documentation-checked component path; proposed workflow, not tested - Native form logic is documented; this workflow drafts a spec, not a generated/importable form. Access and setup: - The live account, entitlement, exact headers, records and field coverage have not been observed. ### 1. Read the existing question and field map Tool: Lawmatics Location: Docs & Forms > Custom Forms > selected form > field settings; Settings > Custom Field Settings Capture only attorney-approved questions, answer options, field type, required flag and CRM destination. Use the actual existing form or approved question document. Do not edit or Save Form during evidence gathering. Expected output: Question inventory with source question IDs and mappings. Next step: Paste the approved, nonconfidential specification into the drafting workspace. Check before continuing: General/Form Only fields do not store in CRM, appear in reports or sync to case management. Changing a label does not change its mapped field. Execution status: Public official documentation checked 2026-10-15; no login, export, live query, import, installation, configuration, message or client workflow was executed. Step documentation: https://help.lawmatics.com/en/articles/10699800-lawmatics-navigation-experience https://help.lawmatics.com/en/articles/10738644-adding-fields-to-a-custom-form ### 2. Draft from the approved source packet Tool: Acrobat PDF Spaces / AI Assistant, optional Location: Acrobat home > PDF Spaces > Create a PDF Space > Paste copied text > Add to PDF Space > chat Paste only the approved nonconfidential packet, source IDs and full Scope note. Paste the exact prompt into the Space chat. Do not upload raw client records; this is a downstream drafting assistant, not an AI in the source application. Prompt: ```text Using only Questions and Scope, draft a Lawmatics form specification. For each question give approved question_id, exact or approved simplified wording, field type, CRM mapping, required flag, controller question and explicit show-if answer. Conditional controllers must be true/false, picklist or multi-picklist; do not derive branches from free text. Include unanswered, every allowed answer, hidden-required and contradictory-answer test cases. Flag any unsupported control or missing CRM mapping. Do not add eligibility scoring, legal advice or sensitive questions; do not edit or publish the form. ``` Expected output: Question-by-question branch specification and synthetic test matrix. Next step: Copy reviewed output into an internal review document or the named downstream tool, preserving evidence IDs. Check before continuing: A required hidden question, unmapped Form Only value or unsupported free-text controller is blocked. Execution status: Public official documentation checked 2026-10-15; no login, export, live query, import, installation, configuration, message or client workflow was executed. Step documentation: https://helpx.adobe.com/acrobat/desktop/explore-pdf-spaces/create-pdf-spaces.html https://helpx.adobe.com/acrobat/desktop/use-acrobat-ai/generative-ai-features/ai-get-answers.html ### 3. Translate the checked branch spec into a build handoff Tool: Form owner, no execution in this research Location: Lawmatics form editor > select dependent field/block > right sidebar Conditional Logic > controller field > answer that shows the field Reviewer maps each approved spec line to these documented controls. Blocks may carry section conditions. Record unsupported compound requirements for manual resolution rather than inventing controls. Expected output: Implementation-ready spec or a list of unsupported conditions. Next step: A separately authorized form editor can build a non-live copy and use synthetic test cases before any publishing/embedding. Check before continuing: Set logic on the dependent question, not the controlling question. Saving changes is outside this read-only verification. Execution status: Public official documentation checked 2026-10-15; no login, export, live query, import, installation, configuration, message or client workflow was executed. Step documentation: https://help.lawmatics.com/en/articles/10699872-conditional-logic-in-custom-forms ### 4. Human review and final action Tool: Responsible firm reviewer Location: Internal Review worksheet / review document Attorney approves data minimization, questions and branching. Form owner checks every synthetic branch and CRM mapping before enabling any client-facing use. Expected output: Approved specification and test checklist; untested implementation. Next step: Human builder receives the spec and question-ID map. Check before continuing: No real intake submission, customer data or automatic case decision. Execution status: Public official documentation checked 2026-10-15; no login, export, live query, import, installation, configuration, message or client workflow was executed. Step documentation: https://help.lawmatics.com/en/articles/10699872-conditional-logic-in-custom-forms https://help.lawmatics.com/en/articles/10738644-adding-fields-to-a-custom-form ## What you will get form-spec.csv: question_id, exact_wording, field_id, field_type, required, branch_rule, persistence; branch-tests.csv: test_id, input_answer, expected_path, unresolved_rule ## Human review and limits Do not collect identification, health or financial details prematurely; avoid unknown-to-false coercion; provide a human assistance path and lawyer-reviewed relationship disclaimer. The assistant drafts or reports only. Check source records and review the output before a human performs any separately approved send or change. No automatic legal decision, money movement, account connection or publication is included. What to measure: In a synthetic pilot, count correctly found exceptions, false alarms, and unresolved inputs. No time or cost saving is assumed. ## Original prepared-input schema approved-script.csv: question_id, exact_wording, answer_type, required, approved_branch_rule, practice_area field-dictionary.csv: field_id, type, persist_in_crm, allowed_values; policy.txt: unknown handling, help route, approved disclaimer Synthetic example input: ```text P1: yes answer follows approved branch P2: no answer skips the branch P3: unknown answer has no approved branch ``` Expected synthetic output: ```text P1/P2: prescribed paths only P3: unresolved branch question No new screening question or rejection ``` Failure check: Do not collect identification, health or financial details prematurely; avoid unknown-to-false coercion; provide a human assistance path and lawyer-reviewed relationship disclaimer. ## Starter files Native blank scaffolds and original synthetic examples may use different schemas. Follow NATIVE-INPUT-MAPPING where supplied. These files do not connect accounts or install automation. - [Download starter kit](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g12-starter-kit.zip) — All inputs, synthetic examples and review notes in one ZIP. No automation is installed. - [Start here: get the sources and prepare the review](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g12/START-HERE.txt) — Documentation-checked acquisition, explicit manual mapping, exact prompts and human review limits - [Input template: approved-script.csv](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g12/approved-script.csv) — Header-only input template; preserve exact names and order - [Synthetic input: approved-script.csv](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g12/approved-script-example.csv) — Fabricated sample rows for an offline manual trial - [Input template: field-dictionary.csv](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g12/field-dictionary.csv) — Header-only input template; preserve exact names and order - [Synthetic input: field-dictionary.csv](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g12/field-dictionary-example.csv) — Fabricated sample rows for an offline manual trial - [Output template: form-spec.csv](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g12/form-spec.csv) — Header-only output template; preserve exact names and order - [Expected output: form-spec.csv](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g12/form-spec-example.csv) — Hand-authored synthetic expected result; not an executed workflow result - [Output template: branch-tests.csv](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g12/branch-tests.csv) — Header-only output template; preserve exact names and order - [Expected output: branch-tests.csv](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g12/branch-tests-example.csv) — Hand-authored synthetic expected result; not an executed workflow result - [Policy/input template: policy.txt](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g12/policy.txt) — Required source/policy preparation scaffold; not populated with firm instructions - [Synthetic policy/input: policy.txt](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g12/policy-example.txt) — Fixture-only context; not an approved production policy - [Synthetic fixture expectations](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g12/fixture-expectations.txt) — Acceptance targets and failure checks; no claim of workflow execution - [Review prompt](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g12/starter-prompt.txt) — Copyable offline review prompt; no executable automation - [Setup and prerequisites](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g12/README.txt) — Recipe-specific setup, evidence sources and usage boundaries - [Native input scaffold: Questions](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g12/native-questions-template.csv) — Empty editorial table for Questions; populate from verified source evidence after reviewed mapping; not a native export - [Native input scaffold: Scope](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g12/native-scope-template.txt) — Approved text input for Scope; complete from verified evidence and include in the AI-visible packet - [Native input mapping and scope guide](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g12/NATIVE-INPUT-MAPPING.txt) — Old-file-to-native-input compatibility map, acquisition requirements, privacy and blocking gates ## Optional original prepared-input prompt Destination: Your firm-approved AI assistant · prepared files This original prompt uses its own prepared-input schema. Do not mix it with native-step tables without the supplied mapping. ```text Convert this approved intake script into a conditional-form specification. List question, exact approved wording, field type, required status, branch rule and whether it must persist in the CRM. Flag unclear or contradictory branches. Generate synthetic test cases covering yes, no, unknown and skipped answers. Do not invent legal screening questions or reject a prospect. INPUTS approved-script.csv: question_id, exact_wording, answer_type, required, approved_branch_rule, practice_area field-dictionary.csv: field_id, type, persist_in_crm, allowed_values; policy.txt: unknown handling, help route, approved disclaimer OUTPUT form-spec.csv: question_id, exact_wording, field_id, field_type, required, branch_rule, persistence; branch-tests.csv: test_id, input_answer, expected_path, unresolved_rule Use only these synthetic or firm-approved inputs and preserve source row/page IDs. Keep missing or conflicting evidence unresolved. Return a draft for the named reviewer. Do not send messages, connect accounts, change records or permissions, move money, or make legal decisions. Keep source files unchanged. List missing prerequisites before continuing. ``` Proposed / not tested · editorial prompt Published by Law Firm Agents. Proposed adaptation; not tested. Not legal advice.