Prepare the story. Keep the agreement.

A refinement template to bring useful questions and leave with more than a number.

By StoryFlop · About these resources · Published on October 17, 2026

How to use it

Complete the expected outcome, criteria and dependencies before the session. Keep open questions visible.
Use one worksheet per story. Record assumptions behind the lowest and highest votes without unnecessary personal data.
After discussion, note whether to clarify, split, investigate or agree an estimate. Repeat if information changes.
Copy the agreement to your backlog. Keep the downloaded worksheet: this editor does not save changes.

Copy and adapt this template for your team. It is not an official Scrum requirement or a substitute for discussion.

Your editable worksheet

Adapt the fields before copying or downloading. Changes stay on this page and are lost when you close or reload it.

Session template

REFINEMENT TEMPLATE · STORYFLOP

Session / date:
Participants and facilitator:
Team reference story:

STORY
Title:
User and expected outcome:
Acceptance criteria (testable behaviours):
1.
2.
3.
Out of scope:
Dependencies and available components:
Tests, review and quality conditions:
Open questions / owner / next review:

DISCUSSION
Initial votes:
Assumptions behind lowest and highest votes:
New information or scope change:
Decision: clarify / split / investigate / agree
Second round (if informative):
Agreed estimate (or reason to defer):
Risks and assumptions accompanying the agreement:
Where the decision is recorded in the backlog:

CLOSING
What did we discover that was not written down?
What will we improve in the next preparation?

Use: copy a STORY and DISCUSSION sheet for each item.
Points are relative to the team, not hours or individual performance measures.
Resource: https://storyflop.com/en/recursos/plantilla-refinamiento

REFINEMENT TEMPLATE · STORYFLOP

Session / date:
Participants and facilitator:
Team reference story:

STORY
Title:
User and expected outcome:
Acceptance criteria (testable behaviours):
1.
2.
3.
Out of scope:
Dependencies and available components:
Tests, review and quality conditions:
Open questions / owner / next review:

DISCUSSION
Initial votes:
Assumptions behind lowest and highest votes:
New information or scope change:
Decision: clarify / split / investigate / agree
Second round (if informative):
Agreed estimate (or reason to defer):
Risks and assumptions accompanying the agreement:
Where the decision is recorded in the backlog:

CLOSING
What did we discover that was not written down?
What will we improve in the next preparation?

Use: copy a STORY and DISCUSSION sheet for each item.
Points are relative to the team, not hours or individual performance measures.
Resource: https://storyflop.com/en/recursos/plantilla-refinamiento

Completed example · Fictional case

Story: Recover access through an emailed link.
Criteria: The link expires, works once and shows a clear error when invalid.
Dependencies and boundaries: Existing email service. A new provider is excluded.
Initial votes: 3, 5 and 13. The 3 omitted expiry tests; the 13 included building email services.
New information: We confirm the existing service and include testing.
Decision: Repeat the round. This fictional team agrees on 5 and records clarified scope in its backlog.
Next review: Review scope and estimate if the available email service changes.

When information is missing

Instead of forcing an estimate, record the question, owner and review time. For example: check invalidation of used links; assign an owner during the session; review before the next round.

Explore three worked stories →

Open the demo →