ScopeGuard Pro: Know when client requests become extra work

I built ScopeGuard Pro because I kept coming back to the same problem with client work. The project starts with a clear agreement, then the small requests begin. One more page. Another revision. An integration. A “quick” change. None of those requests feels dramatic on its own, which is exactly why scope creep is so easy to ignore until you’ve already done a lot of extra work. The hardest part for me wasn’t generating a Change Order. It was answering a much simpler question fairly: Was this actually included in what we agreed, or is it new work? That’s what I’ve spent most of my time rebuilding ScopeGuard Pro around. You add the original scope or contract, and when a new request comes in, ScopeGuard Pro compares it against that agreement and any scope changes that were approved later. It gives a first assessment, estimates the likely extra hours, cost and timeline impact, and explains why it reached that conclusion. You can accept the AI suggestion or override it. Nothing has to be blindly trusted. If the work is genuinely extra, it can be turned into a Change Order and sent to the client for approval. There’s also a history of what was requested, what was decided, and what the client approved, because that context gets messy surprisingly fast. Early launch offer: the first 50 customers get 2 project credits for $9. I’m still very interested in where people would draw the line on trust here. If you work with client projects — freelance, agency, construction, consulting, anything similar — would you let AI make the first scope assessment if you could review and override it? And what would make you say “no, I’d never trust this”?