Operations & ReportingProposed workflow

Find gaps in recorded time

Compare activity records with time entries without guessing how long work took.

Tools for the documented steps

These tools support separate parts of the method. The prompt does not connect them or verify a native integration.

Practice relevance

Cross-practice idea · A general operational method. Review the stated tool and jurisdiction limits before use.

The problem

Compare activity records with time entries without guessing how long work took.

Why it matters: Small tasks can go unrecorded, while overlapping records can duplicate time. A reconciliation gives timekeepers questions to resolve from actual work records without inventing duration or billability.

Sources & evidence

Proposed / not tested. The public discussion supports the problem; the method source supports only the documented features. No outcome from this adapted recipe has been verified.

What’s been verified

The linked sources support the complaint and documented method components. We have not run this recipe or verified its results. The example below is synthetic, not a customer result.

What to measure: During the pilot, count findings confirmed by the reviewer, false alarms, and missing-input cases. Do not infer time or money saved.

  • Pain evidence: Billable hours feel impossible ↗Billable hours feel impossible, 2026-07-03, older. OP describes working on 15+ matters with small tasks and forgetting to start/stop timers. This supports a missing-record check, not automatic estimates of billable duration.
  • Method: Clio time entries ↗Clio time entries documents entries associated with tasks, communications and other activities; Clio reports/export documents CSV/PDF reports and report-specific date caveats.
  • Method: Clio reports/export ↗Additional official capability reference. It does not validate the complete proposed recipe.

Source checked: October 15, 2026. Pain reports are self-reported and identities are unverified. Method documentation supports components, not a tested end-to-end workflow. We wrote these prompts. The adapted workflow hasn’t been tested.

Suggested approach

Start when: Day-end review

  1. compare approved activity metadata with existing entries
  2. Keep row or page references and mark missing or ambiguous evidence. Do not apply the suggested changes.
  3. The responsible staff member checks the draft against the source records and approves any separate action.

Limits and review

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.

Who reviews it: Timekeeper confirms actual work, duration and matter; billing reviewer determines treatment. Test overlapping activities and a non-billable task to ensure neither becomes fabricated billable time.

What you need

Your firm-approved AI assistant · prepared files

  • Clio Manage with access to the selected matters; Manage AI entitlement only for the optional AI Actions view.
  • Timekeeper review is mandatory. Actual durations come only from contemporaneous recorded evidence, never AI estimation.
  • Firm-approved Excel; optional Copilot entitlement and tenant approval for the exact minimized data. Native Excel analysis can be done manually if Copilot is absent.
  • Keep raw exports and identifying source pointers in a separate restricted location. The AI workbook contains only approved alias-based tables and visible policy/scope text, never raw client records on another tab.
  • 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 proposed route; source collection and human approval required

Before you start
  • AI Actions update overnight and activity suggestions concern the prior 24 hours. This is a candidate-finding aid, not a complete historical audit.
  • A communication, document or completed task does not establish billable work or duration. No unrecorded minutes are reconstructed.
Check access and setup
  • Actual account access, plan and source-data completeness have not been tested.
  1. Inspect native unlogged-activity suggestions

    Clio Manage AI, optional · Matters > chosen matter > Dashboard > AI Actions card

    Review suggestions for unlogged communications, notes or completed tasks. Open the cited source to check that the activity exists; do not accept or save a suggested entry. No prompt is required for this native proactive feature. Without AI, inspect the matter’s Communications, Notes and Tasks subtabs directly for the bounded period.

    Expected output
    Candidate source activities with actual timestamps and source references, not proposed billable time.
    Next step
    Create a reviewed activity ledger in the next step.
    Check before continuing
    AI suggestions are refreshed overnight and limited in scope. No suggestion and no visible time entry is not proof of missing work.
  2. Check existing recorded time

    Clio Manage · Selected matter > Activities; main Activities table for date/user filtering

    Read matching time entries for the same matter, person and period. Use actual recorded time and work description; distinguish hourly duration from flat-rate quantity. Keep any source link between an activity and entry only when explicit. For details use the entry’s existing detail/Edit view without changing or saving it.

    Expected output
    Reviewed entries with recorded duration, actor and source reference. This route uses bounded manual capture; a general activity CSV export schema is not verified.
    Next step
    Keep source pointers restricted; map alias-based Activities and Entries tables.
    Check before continuing
    Different timestamps or wording do not prove distinct work; a single entry may legitimately cover multiple activities.
  3. Map the observed records to the starter input

    Excel and authorized staff · Separate analysis workbook > Home > Format as Table

    Populate activities.csv with activity_id,matter_alias,actor_alias,activity_datetime,activity_type and actual_duration_minutes_if_recorded. Leave duration unknown unless actually recorded. Populate entries.csv with entry_id, an explicitly known activity_id_if_known, matter_alias,actor_alias,recorded_minutes and a safe narrative_category. Add reviewed period, timezone and coverage exclusions to Scope. Create named tables for Activities and Entries. Put the policy and review scope in visible worksheets or paste them into the next prompt.

    Expected output
    Two staff-created tables retaining actual source evidence, with no invented time.
    Next step
    Check the mapping against each original source before using AI.
    Check before continuing
    Aliases and missing policy fields are staff-created; do not relabel a native export as the kit schema. Unknown stays blank/unknown, not false or zero.
  4. Review the bounded evidence with Copilot

    Excel Copilot, optional · Approved analysis workbook > Copilot icon at lower right > Chat only

    Use Chat only and submit the prompt. Without Copilot: compare explicit activity IDs, then manually inspect ambiguous matters/persons/dates without adding time.

    Expected output
    Timekeeper-review candidates, not time entries to post.
    Next step
    Copy the draft exception list to the reviewer; retain row references.
    Check before continuing
    Check every flagged row and the scope. A fluent answer is not evidence of completeness; no automatic workbook or source-system edits.
  5. Approve the review result

    Final human review

    Responsible staff reviewer · Reviewed local worksheet

    The actual timekeeper checks contemporaneous records and decides whether any entry is missing or wrong under the firm’s billing rules. Close a candidate as already captured, unresolved or requiring a separately approved correction.

    Expected output
    Reviewed gap checklist with no inferred billable minutes.
    Next step
    Any external message, source change, payment or deletion requires its own authorized process.
    Check before continuing
    Do not use AI-generated duration or a default minimum charge. The workflow stops before posting time.

What you’ll get

Approved assistant workspace for matching; output time-review.csv with activity_id, candidate_entry_ids, match_status, duration_evidence, question.

Inputs and a sample test Synthetic example · not a measured result

Input files

  • activities.csv: activity_id, matter_alias, actor_alias, activity_datetime, activity_type, actual_duration_minutes_if_recorded. entries.csv: entry_id, activity_id_if_known, matter_alias, actor_alias, recorded_minutes, narrative_category.

Synthetic example

ACT1: no entry, duration not recorded
ACT2: two entries claim the same activity
ACT3: non-billable activity with recorded minutes

Expected output

ACT1: duration unknown, ask timekeeper
ACT2: possible duplicate
ACT3: preserve minutes and supplied non-billable status

Test a failure

Timekeeper confirms actual work, duration and matter; billing reviewer determines treatment. Test overlapping activities and a non-billable task to ensure neither becomes fabricated billable time.

Try with the sample files

Follow the tool steps above and use the inputs named in each step. Where provided, native-* files are blank scaffolds and NATIVE-INPUT-MAPPING explains their fields. Original examples and the optional full review prompt use a separate prepared-input schema. Keep them separate unless the mapping explicitly connects them. Downloading a kit does not connect accounts or prove the workflow works.

Download inputs and checklist 8 files

Instructions, blank templates and separate synthetic examples; these files do not install an automation. Blank templates still need verified source data.

Optional full review prompt for prepared inputs

Prepared-input review prompt with Your firm-approved AI assistant · prepared files

Proposed / not tested · editorial prompt. This prompt uses the original prepared-input schema shown in the sample test. Step prompts may use different tables. Follow NATIVE-INPUT-MAPPING where supplied; do not mix the original examples with native-step inputs without mapping and checking every field.

Read original method Read pain evidence

Published by Law Firm Agents. These are source-linked editorial adaptations; no end-to-end execution is claimed. Read the plain-text version.