Who this is for: Teams explaining permission-sensitive features.
What to prepare
- Role rules
- Matched object screens
- Allowed-action confirmation
Copyable creative brief
An authored planning example. Replace illustrative details with your approved product facts and assets.
Create a 30-second illustrative two-role comparison for request R-029. Use verified screenshots for Contributor and Reviewer accounts in the same sample workspace. Begin with Contributor viewing R-029 and label the role plainly. Show the actual approval-control state and explain its documented restriction without inventing an error. Transition through “Separate reviewer account,” preserving R-029’s identifier. Show Reviewer opening the same request and using the verified approval action. End on the confirmed status. Keep unrelated fields and filters matched. Do not animate the contributor avatar transforming into a reviewer or imply that users can grant themselves access. The fictional example demonstrates one configured permission boundary, not a claim of comprehensive security or Animro role support.
Make it your own
- Roles
- Use documented names and exact capability differences.
- Object
- Keep the same sample record and status.
- Restricted control
- Show its observed hidden, disabled or unavailable state.
Verify the boundary
Obtain the real permission rule and confirm that a disabled control is caused by role, not missing data or status. Capture both views under the same task conditions.
Adapt the comparison
For a short overview, use a split view with role labels and one highlighted control. For training, show the permitted next step for the restricted user, such as requesting review, only if that route exists.
Fix overbroad language
Replace “Cannot access the request” if the role can view but not approve it. Replace “Administrator” with the actual role name. One observed difference cannot justify a blanket statement about all data or all workspaces.
Review checklist
- Both roles are clearly labeled.
- The restriction’s cause is verified.
- No self-granted privilege is implied.