You want supplier stock updates off your team's daily task list, but a developer needs more than “keep Shopify in sync” to scope the work. Start with sample files, the systems that currently change stock, and a small first milestone you can inspect. Include how the old process will hand over to the new one, so a successful test doesn't leave two updaters competing over the same quantity.
Quick answer
Bring a supplier sample with sensitive data removed, matching Shopify variant examples, and the system responsible for each location's stock. Agree on a read-only first milestone, the conditions that must stop updates, and who approves the results. Before live use, require a handover plan that stops the old updater for the agreed products and locations and checks for unfinished work. Keep unresolved supplier questions visible in the proposal.
What decision should the brief make possible?
The brief should let a developer explain what they can build, what they need to investigate, and what your team must decide. Replace “connect our suppliers to Shopify” with a result you can review: proposed stock changes for an agreed supplier and Shopify location, with each change traced to its source row.
If you are still choosing between an app and custom work, start with my supplier sync buying-decision worksheet. This guide begins at the next step: assembling the handoff for a developer who needs to scope the integration. It does not assume custom software is already justified.
My reference point is BC Supply Ops for BeautyCorner.gr, which I built for a 70,000+ product store and 7 suppliers. Three suppliers are automated and four use spreadsheets. Supplier-specific parsers normalize those sheets because their headers, currencies, SKU prefixes, and stock conventions differ.
I separated catalog matching from publishing: the engine checks supplier barcodes against the live store without Shopify writes, then produces a reviewable plan. That gives another project a useful first milestone. The briefing, testing, and handover steps below are my recommendations for a new engagement, not an account of how BeautyCorner commissioned or switched to its platform.
Which supplier evidence should you assemble?
Give each sample a capture date, a supplier label, and an explanation of whether it represents the full catalog or only changed rows. Preserve formatting that affects interpretation, including leading zeros and empty cells. Remove credentials, customer details, and commercially sensitive values that the initial assessment does not need.
Include normal rows and the cases your team already resolves manually. Label a deliberately altered file as a test sample and state what should happen when it's processed. Keep a separate note when the supplier has not confirmed a field's meaning; a developer should not have to infer whether a blank means zero.
Supplier evidence pack to prepare before discovery
| Item | What to supply | Question it should answer |
|---|---|---|
| Feed sample | Original column names, format, capture time, and export scope | What does a complete delivery look like? |
| Field dictionary | Identifier, quantity, units, status values, and blank-value meanings | Which values can be interpreted without guessing? |
| Matching examples | Supplier row beside its intended Shopify variant, including size or pack differences | What identifies the exact sellable item? |
| Delivery arrangement | API or file method, documented schedule, and supplier contact role | Who can resolve a changed or missing feed? |
| Current manual corrections | Examples with sensitive data removed and the operator's reason | Which business rules are absent from the file? |
| Volume evidence | Counts from a dated export and observed update frequency | What workload should discovery investigate? |
Use the barcode matching review checklist when the matching examples expose ambiguity. A useful brief can contain unresolved matches. It should identify who can decide them and keep them outside automatic writes until resolved.
Who owns each quantity and each write?
List everything that currently changes inventory: staff edits, supplier apps, warehouse software, imports, and existing custom jobs. Beside each, record its destination, the quantity it controls, and when it runs. Ask the operations owner to review that list before the developer replaces anything.
Shopify's multiple-location inventory guidance explains that inventory is tracked separately at each location. Your brief should therefore identify the intended location for each flow. Supplier availability and stock physically held by your warehouse need explicit definitions in that map.
For example, consider a proposed integration that updates supplier availability while a warehouse system manages local stock. State which destination the new job may update and which destination belongs to the warehouse system. This is a hypothetical scoping example, not a description of BeautyCorner's location configuration.
Use the supplier and warehouse stock reconciliation worksheet to compare those sources by location, inventory state, and observation time before proposing corrections.
Ask the developer what happens if stock changes while an update is being prepared. Shopify's inventorySetQuantities documentation says to use this operation only for the system responsible for the authoritative inventory quantity, its “source of truth.” Resolve that ownership before selecting the write method; the brief doesn't need to prescribe an API call.
What should the first milestone deliver?
Make the first milestone a report you can inspect without changing the store: matched products and proposed changes for an agreed supplier sample. Specify the permitted products, destination location, and fields. List product creation, repricing, and supplier purchasing separately so each requires its own scope decision.
In BC Supply Ops, import, stock sync, dispatch, and repricing produce plans before live writes. Short or broken feeds hold removals for review, and live actions require typed confirmations and separate permission to write. Use the same review point to agree on what a demonstration must show.
Acceptance evidence to agree with the developer
| Situation to demonstrate | Evidence the milestone should produce | Who should accept it |
|---|---|---|
| A normal matching row | Source row, matched variant, destination, current value, and proposed value | Catalog and operations owners |
| An ambiguous product | An unresolved record with a reason and no proposed write | Catalog owner |
| A short or rejected feed | A visible hold with affected scope and a review action | Operations owner |
| A changed destination value | A conflict or refreshed proposal under the agreed ownership rule | Inventory owner |
| An interrupted trial | A record separating completed, pending, and uncertain actions | Developer and operations owner |
Attach an expected outcome to each sample before the demonstration. Use the feed-health hold and release guide for detailed failure cases instead of expanding this brief into an implementation manual. Record any acceptance question that still depends on supplier confirmation.
After the read-only milestone passes, agree on a trial limited to specified products and locations in a suitable test environment. The proposal should explain how the operator stops the job and checks the results before broader use.
Who stops the old process when the new one starts?
A correct test result doesn't settle who updates tomorrow's stock. Ask for a switching plan before approving live use, especially if a spreadsheet import, app, or scheduled job already changes the same quantities. The old process may still have an upload in progress or a failed update waiting to retry.
For a hypothetical fragrance store replacing a daily supplier CSV upload, the brief could include the following handover. Here, warehouse stock stays with the existing warehouse system; only the agreed supplier quantities are changing hands.
Example handover requirements for replacing a supplier stock updater
| Stage | Requirement to put in the brief | Evidence to request |
|---|---|---|
| Compare first | The existing process continues; the new integration only proposes changes | Both results for the same supplier file, with differences explained |
| Stop the old updater | The operations owner stops uploads for the agreed products and locations; the developer checks unfinished jobs and retries | Last completed update, unresolved actions, and confirmation that no old write can still run for that scope |
| Start the new updater | Read current stock again and rebuild the proposal before the first approved batch | Accepted supplier file, current quantities, approved changes, and actual results |
| Handle a failed start | Pause new writes and establish what changed before choosing which process resumes | Completed and uncertain changes, a current stock check, and a named person approving the next step |
Make the boundary specific. “Stop inventory updates” is too broad if the warehouse connector must keep running. Likewise, resuming yesterday's CSV upload is not a recovery plan until someone has checked whether its values still apply.
Ask each developer to identify where this handover appears in their proposal. If one quote ends at a working test and another includes the switch, operator instructions, and initial monitoring, clarify those deliverables before comparing prices. You don't need to prescribe the code; you need to know who owns the first live run and what happens if it stops partway through.
What access and support belong in the proposal?
Use exports with sensitive data removed and supplier documentation for initial scoping wherever possible. When store access becomes necessary, Shopify's collaborator account guidance lets the merchant review requested permissions. Agree on the access needed for the task and keep tokens out of the project brief.
Ask for named responsibilities alongside the deliverables. The merchant needs an owner for supplier questions and business-rule decisions; the developer needs to state responsibility for mappings, deployment, monitoring, and technical maintenance. Define how a changed spreadsheet reaches the maintainer and who authorizes a revised interpretation.
Request the approved mapping, operating instructions, log locations, and a documented stop procedure. Ask who maintains API compatibility and how support distinguishes a defect from a new requirement. These responsibilities belong in the proposal alongside the build.
Where should you start?
Copy the evidence table into your working document and fill it for the supplier creating the most manual work. Add your store URL, current stock updaters, unresolved field meanings, desired first milestone, constraints, and timeline. Use the handover table to name the person who can stop the old process and approve the new one. Leave unknowns visible for the developer to investigate.
AI tools helped draft this article; the project details and Shopify references were checked before publishing. Originally published on iessentialshub.com.
Top comments (0)