A prototype reviewer usually needs enough access to inspect the agreed journey and report findings, not permission to modify the project. Grant editing access only when changing the app is explicitly part of the assignment.
Start with the feedback task
Lovable documents role-based project access for workspace members and external collaborators, including Admin, Editor, and Viewer roles. Role availability and external-collaborator controls vary by plan and workspace settings.
Those names do not justify assuming identical permissions across every workspace. Before inviting someone, verify the relevant role's current permissions and whether the intended external collaboration is supported. Distinguish inspecting behaviour, modifying implementation, and controlling integrations as separate needs.
Use a task-to-permission worksheet
Instead of assigning a role by seniority, complete these task cards:
- Wording review: read specified screens and return suggested replacements. Required action is observation, not direct editing.
- Journey review: attempt a synthetic booking and report blockers. Required access is the agreed test surface; project modification is not part of the task.
- Implementation fix: change a defined validation rule. Editing may be necessary, with a named owner reviewing the result.
- Integration review: assess a proposed connection. Decide whether documentation alone is sufficient before considering any configuration access.
For each card, add the reviewer, review deadline, permitted actions, prohibited actions, and access-removal owner. This is an editorial permission worksheet, not a statement of Lovable's exact role matrix.
Hypothetical outside-reviewer assignment
Suppose a Jaipur founder asks a freelance designer to review a coaching-centre prototype. The assignment is limited to three screens: course list, trial booking, and confirmation.
Give the reviewer fictional course names and a synthetic booking identity. Ask for five findings, each containing the affected screen, expected behaviour, observed behaviour, and suggested wording or layout change.
Evaluate success by whether the founder can reproduce each finding and decide what to change. Do not judge the review by how many edits the designer makes. If the designer needs to implement an accepted change later, treat that as a separate assignment with newly checked permissions.
No customer records, private material, or shared credentials are necessary for this exercise.
Stop if access exceeds the assignment
Pause the invitation if the available access exposes more than the task requires or if role permissions remain unclear. The next step can be a sanitised written walkthrough and feedback document while permissions are clarified.
If comparing paid access routes, use the coding catalog to check access format and saved terms before buying. Marketplace account/code/token offers are not proof of official subscription equivalence or particular collaboration rights.
Sources and scope
Source material checked 29 October 2026; features/policies may change. Lovable sharing documentation establishes role-based sharing and plan/workspace variation. The task cards and hypothetical reviewer assignment are editorial advice, not a verified permission matrix.