The two shapes a workflow can take

Exactly two shapes

A workflow comes in one of two shapes, never a third. Picture a caterer. Sometimes the food is already cooked and the job is only to plate it and send it out on a timeline. Other times the kitchen has to cook first, and nothing leaves the building until it is done. Workflows split the same way, and knowing which one you are asking for keeps the result predictable.

Shape one: schedule what you already made

You point the workflow at creatives that already sit in your library. Atlas plans a calendar, spreads them across the number of days you named, and rotates the platforms you have connected. Nothing new is generated, so the only work is planning and scheduling. This is the durable sibling of a plain content-calendar request.

Shape two: generate, then schedule

You describe the creatives to make. The workflow generates them, waits for the renders to finish, plans a calendar from the ones that actually came out, then schedules them. This is the shape that justifies the durable machinery, because scheduling here depends on renders that take real time.

What it costs

Each render and the planning call bill the same as if you had made and planned them by hand. Scheduling organic posts is free. So shape one costs only the planning call, while shape two costs every render plus the plan. There is no separate workflow fee.

What it is not

A workflow is not a general visual builder with steps you drag into place. These two shapes are the entire surface. There is no research-to-creative workflow either; grounded research and strategy belong to a project's first-run setup, not to anything you author here.