Site scope
Site scope answers where someone can work. It narrows the sites a person sees and acts on.
It grants no capability and removes none. Someone limited to one warehouse can do everything there that their role allows — they simply cannot see the others.
No restrictions means every site
This is the thing to get right, and it is the opposite of what most people assume.
Scope works by listing the sites a person is limited to.
- No entries → unrestricted. They can see and act on every site in the organisation.
- One or more entries → exactly those sites, and no others.
So a member you have never scoped is not locked out — they have access to everything. A new starter you have not got round to restricting can see the lot.
Why this catches people out
It fails silently and in the permissive direction.
Someone reasoning "no rows means no sites" will assume a person is restricted when they are not. Nothing errors, nothing is blocked, and no warning appears. The person just sees more than intended, and nobody finds out unless they look.
If restriction matters, check it explicitly rather than assuming an unscoped member is limited.
Owners and admins cannot be limited
Whatever entries exist for them, owners and admins see every site. They run the organisation, so restricting where they act would not be meaningful.
Adding a scope entry for an admin has no effect. If someone should genuinely be limited to one site, they need a role that can be limited.
Removing a restriction
Removing a site from someone's scope leaves a record behind rather than erasing it, so the change is auditable. Re-adding it later creates a fresh entry.
Worth remembering when narrowing down to the last site: removing every entry does not lock someone out — it unrestricts them. If you meant to remove their access, change or remove their membership instead.
Scope and roles are set separately
Both are on the member, under the organisation's Members, and both need organisation-admin access. Changing one never changes the other — see how access works.