Claude to track wedding contracts and drafts
Brit created a separate email address for wedding planning, then gave Claude access to that focused inbox. Quotes, contracts, payment terms and timeline decisions were scattered across messages and attachments, making it difficult to answer basic questions without another search.
Original prompt
Shared by the source author. See source notes for context.
How much is left to pay for catering?
Reach people exploring AI agents
See placements →Evidence at a glance
Sourced account- Source author
- Brit
- Original account
- Read the source ↗
- Published
- Source link checked
- Reported result
- The planning system surfaced a missed deposit and tracks vendor actions, menu approvals and contract-derived payment status with weekly updates.
- Human involvement
- Brit reviewed drafts before sending and retained creative and vendor decisions; autonomous deposit payment is not described.
A linked account supports attribution. It does not mean we independently reproduced its result.
Report an issue with this case
Open correction emailOpens your email app with the case link included. Nothing is sent automatically.
How the agent did it
- Keep wedding correspondence in a dedicated inbox with contracts and the timeline.
- Use Claude to extract tasks, payment status and contextual reply drafts.
- Review and send replies while a weekly script updates the shared planning hub.
Brit created a separate email address for wedding planning, then gave Claude access to that focused inbox. Quotes, contracts, payment terms and timeline decisions were scattered across messages and attachments, making it difficult to answer basic questions without another search.
Claude could retrieve what remained to pay for catering, identify overdue tasks and find what the photographer had said about timing. The workflow then moved from questions to draft replies. Claude prepared messages using previous decisions and open issues, while Brit reviewed the drafts and clicked send. It also surfaced a forgotten hair-and-makeup deposit.
Using Claude Code, she brought the inbox, contract folder and timeline document into a shared wedding-planning system hosted on Vercel. It displayed vendor status, current menu approvals, tasks and payments extracted from contracts. A script runs every Sunday at nine to scan new emails and update those records.
The agent's output supports coordination, while the couple still makes the wedding's design decisions. Brit describes creative visualization as helpful but keeps taste and tradeoffs with herself. The source does not report the wedding as completed, verify bank payments or show that contract interpretation was independently checked. The concrete result is a current planning hub and reviewed email workflow, rather than autonomous vendor selection or payment.
Prompt
Original prompt
Source: britbiddle.substack.com · Brit
Frequently asked questions
Why start with a separate inbox?
It limited the initial context to wedding correspondence and kept personal and work threads outside the experiment.
Did Claude send the vendor replies?
Brit says she reviewed the drafts folder and clicked send.
What kept the hub current?
A Sunday 9am script scanned new emails and updated the wedding-planning system.
More details
About this account
Claude searched wedding records and drafted replies; Claude Code built the hub and weekly email-update script.
Firsthand source opened and read. Prompt is a verbatim excerpt of the published original instruction.
Credit: Brit
Source published
Added to Agents In Use
Source checked
Tools and topics
Claude Code · Dedicated wedding inbox · Contract folder · Vercel
Wedding deposits · Contract extraction · Reviewed vendor email
Editorial completeness: 100/100. Measures documented fields, not agent performance or verified outcomes.