Use case · Agencies

Keep one client's context out of every other client's build

An agency cannot risk one client’s private decisions appearing in another client’s work. Shared notes, unclear project selection, and copy-paste can leak context. Create a distinct project boundary per client, while keeping portfolio visibility at summary level. Verify current permissions and configuration before relying on product controls for contractual or regulatory needs.

The setup

A simple way to run it in Hark

  1. 01Create a separate workshop

    Keep each client’s brief, files, links, decisions, and delivery notes in that project, not a shared catch-all. Use clear names and check access before importing material. See working with agents.

  2. 02Confirm project at session start

    Select the intended project and read its brief before using Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, or another supported client. Sessions are described as project-bound until an explicit switch. Also confirm client, repository, branch, and task; stop if they do not match.

  3. 03Separate oversight from details

    Use the Agency overview, where available, to review active, blocked, or stale work across clients. Keep detailed rationale and files in the relevant workshop. Restrict portfolio summaries to information their readers need.

  4. 04Invite guests carefully

    Invite the intended client to the intended project, select appropriate sections, and verify guest permissions in the current product. Review the room as a recipient when possible. See document client builds.

Do this today without Hark: inspect the places context can cross

Start with two current client engagements. Check their repository folders, shared documents, agent conversations, access lists, and environment bookmarks. Clear names help, but a name is not an access boundary. Identify any catch-all note that includes both clients' private material. Split it into client-specific records and decide what belongs in an internal portfolio summary instead.

Before an agent session, verify the selected client, local directory, repository, branch, and task. Do not paste one client's brief into another client's conversation to reuse the structure. Copy an empty template instead. End with a client-specific handoff and store it in the correct place. Review collaborator access when an engagement or role changes. These manual habits are useful even with software isolation because files, email, local agent history, and external repositories have their own access rules. A project system cannot undo sensitive material pasted into the wrong external conversation.

Do this today with Hark: make the boundary explicit

Create a distinct workshop for the client when the people and access boundary need to be separate. Add the client's projects inside that workshop, rather than making every task its own workshop. Keep private documents, decisions, links, and delivery notes in the intended record. Check the current workspace memberships and project-sharing settings before inviting anyone.

Scope agent access to the work it needs. Read-only access is different from permission to propose changes or write routine updates. Have the agent select the correct project and read its brief before editing. Hark's working sessions are project-bound; changing projects requires an explicit switch. That does not mean Hark controls every file on the agent's machine or clears the tool's existing conversation. Check the local repository and conversation context too.

Use cross-client oversight for status, blockers, and responsibilities without copying detailed private rationale into a public summary. When sharing a client room, choose appropriate sections and inspect the actual visible content. Do not assume a familiar template has inherited the correct links. Verify repositories, environments, and recipients individually after creating each engagement. Keep credentials outside the project notes and direct authorized people to the service that manages access.

Reuse structure, not client information

An agency can standardize a checklist for scope, test evidence, handoff gaps, and client questions. Reuse that blank structure while creating client-specific content in the right record. Before each milestone, compare the project name, repository, and shared links with the delivery. A copied staging URL can be as misleading as a copied decision.

When staff change, review workshop membership and external repository access separately. Give the incoming builder a current brief and one bounded task, then ask them to identify missing information. Keep portfolio readers' access narrower than the access needed to implement a client project whenever appropriate. Product isolation supports a boundary; it is not a compliance certification or a substitute for contractual review. The client documentation workflow explains how to keep each isolated record resumable, while this setup keeps the record attached to the correct engagement throughout the work.

Starter build

Hark’s public project page

Starter builds are coming. Until then, use Hark’s own documented build as the example structure for this setup.

View the public project page placeholder →
Use this setup

Common questions

Does separation guarantee compliance?

No. Project separation is not a compliance certification. Check security and contractual requirements independently.

Can I see work across projects?

The use-case describes an Agency overview while project records remain separate. Confirm availability in your workspace.

Can an agent switch projects?

Sessions are described as bound until an explicit switch. Verify project and repository before acting.

What can guests see?

Use project-scoped room and section controls, then verify the exact visible content and permissions before sharing.