Shopify App Integrations Scope Template

Integrations are rarely “just install the app.”

In practice, the work is:

• aligning workflows (what should happen when an order is placed, refunded, partially shipped, etc.)
• aligning data shape (products, variants, customer fields, metafields)
• aligning ownership (who configures what, who pays for what, who approves what)
• managing risk (edge cases, rate limits, sandbox environments, and rollback)

If you don’t scope those explicitly, you’ll take responsibility for every unknown.

Below is a copy/paste Shopify app integrations scope template you can use in Google Docs.

If you want the scope to assemble itself from inputs (systems involved, sync direction, data volume, etc.), RuleDox can generate a near-complete integration scope draft inside Google Docs.

Assemble an integration scope in Google Docs → https://ruledox.app/live-demo

---

• Shopify agencies implementing app stacks and integrations (subscriptions, reviews, loyalty, ERP/WMS/3PL, accounting)
• Teams that want consistent integration scopes and fewer surprises
• Projects where integrations affect checkout, fulfillment, or finance (high risk)

• Simple “install app and toggle settings” jobs where no workflows/data are affected

---

A good integration scope names the systems, defines what data moves (and how), defines what workflows must work end-to-end, defines the test plan, and defines the rollout/support window. If any of those are missing, you don’t have an integration scope—you have a hope.

---

Client: [Client name]

Project: Shopify integration implementation

Systems in scope (named):

• Shopify store: [store URL]
• System/App #1: [name + vendor]
• System/App #2: [name + vendor]

Objective:

• [e.g., sync orders to ERP and sync inventory back to Shopify]
• [e.g., implement subscriptions with correct proration and fulfillment rules]

Definition of done:

• [short, testable statement: “Order placed in Shopify appears in X with correct line items/taxes within Y minutes”]

Client provides:

• Shopify admin access (appropriate permissions)
• access to app accounts, billing, and admin consoles
• API credentials where needed
• access to sandbox environments (if available)

Define exactly what data is mapped.

Entities in scope:

• Products / variants
• Customers
• Orders
• Refunds
• Fulfillments
• Inventory

Key fields / special cases:

• SKU conventions
• variants/options constraints
• discounts/promos representation
• taxes and duties representation
• metafields/custom fields: [list]

Mapping deliverable:

• Source → destination field mapping document

Integrations fail in edge cases, not happy paths.

Workflows that must work (select and define):

• new order → fulfillment → shipment notification
• partial fulfillments
• cancellations
• refunds (partial/full)
• exchanges (if applicable)
• backorders / split shipments
• subscription renewals / skips / cancellations
• inventory adjustments

For each workflow, define:

• trigger event
• expected system behavior
• owner of each step

• Sync direction: [one-way / two-way]
• Sync timing: [real-time / scheduled]
• Conflict rules: [source of truth for inventory, customer data]

If integration changes the storefront UX:

• widgets added/modified
• checkout impacts
• PDP/cart impacts

Define what pages/templates are affected and what “done” means.

Environments:

• Sandbox/test store: [yes/no]
• Staging theme: [yes/no]

Test cases include:

• at least [N] test orders with different scenarios
• at least [N] refunds
• at least [N] inventory sync scenarios

Acceptance criteria:

• defined workflows pass end-to-end
• critical data fields map correctly
• no critical regressions in checkout and fulfillment

• rollout date window
• monitoring responsibilities
• rollback plan (what triggers rollback, and steps)

• post-launch support window: [e.g., 3–5 business days]
• what is included during support window

Unless explicitly listed in “In-scope deliverables,” the following are excluded:

• custom app development beyond configuration and standard APIs
• data cleansing/enrichment
• rebuilding business processes (process consulting)
• large-scale historical migrations (orders/customers) unless specified
• vendor delays and vendor-side bugs (agency coordinates but doesn’t control)

• vendor documentation is accurate and APIs are accessible
• client provides access and timely approvals
• scope variables remain stable; changes follow change request process

A change request is triggered by:

• adding new systems/apps beyond the named list
• expanding entities/fields beyond the mapping
• new workflows discovered (e.g., complex returns/exchanges) not previously scoped
• shifting from one-way to two-way sync

---

Fix: define what must happen for each workflow end-to-end.

Fix: integrations break on field mismatches. Always map entities/fields.

Fix: two-way sync needs conflict rules and source-of-truth decisions.

Fix: list scenarios (refunds, partial fulfillments, inventory adjustments).

---

Integration scopes are full of conditionals. If you have rules like:

• “If two-way sync, include conflict resolution section”
• “If subscriptions, include renewal/skip/cancel test cases”

…RuleDox can assemble the right scope from inputs inside Google Docs.

Assemble an integration scope in Google Docs → https://ruledox.app/live-demo

---

• Migration scope: https://ruledox.app/content/shopify/shopify-migration-scope-of-work
• Store build scope: https://ruledox.app/content/shopify/shopify-store-build-scope-of-work
• B2B / wholesale scope: https://ruledox.app/content/shopify/shopify-b2b-wholesale-scope

---

Because the work is rarely in the install step—it’s in workflow definition, data mapping, and handling edge cases safely.

Include coordination and troubleshooting, but exclude vendor-controlled delays/bugs. Otherwise you’re signing up to own someone else’s product.