You've tried training clients to write better bug reports. Sent them a template explaining exactly what information you need. Created a "how to report bugs" document with examples. Maybe even walked them through it on a call.
They still send you: "It's broken."
Here's why training doesn't work: clients won't read your documentation. They're busy running their own business. Describing technical issues is genuinely hard when you don't know the terminology. And mostly, they just want the bug fixed—they don't want to become experts at reporting bugs.
So stop trying to train them. Instead, design a system that works with how clients actually behave.
Make it impossible to submit bad bug reports.
The best bug report template in the world doesn't help if clients ignore it. But you can't submit a vague video. A 30-second screen recording showing exactly what happened is inherently detailed. The video IS the context you need.
When a client types "the form doesn't work," you have no idea what that means. Which form? What doesn't work about it? What did they enter? What error appeared? You need 5 follow-up questions.
When a client sends a 30-second video, you see: which form, what they entered, what they clicked, what error appeared, what browser they're using (visible in the video), what page they're on (URL bar is visible). Zero questions needed.
This is why Lantern makes video the default input method—you can't submit a vague video, so clients can't submit vague bug reports. Though honestly, you can do this with any bug tracker. Just tell clients: "When you find a bug, record a quick Loom video showing me what's happening."
Tools like Loom are free. ScreenPal works too. Some bug trackers have video support built in. The specific tool doesn't matter. What matters is making video the expected format instead of text descriptions.
Stop asking clients for technical details they don't know.
Don't ask clients for their browser version. They don't know and don't care. Don't ask for screen resolution or console errors or what HTTP status code they got. They have no idea what you're talking about.
Use tools that capture this automatically. Sentry catches JavaScript errors with full stack traces and browser info. LogRocket records actual user sessions so you can watch exactly what they did. FullStory tracks user behavior across your site. These tools cost money but they're worth it because they eliminate the "what browser are you using?" back-and-forth entirely.
Or just look at the video. If the client records their screen, you can see Chrome or Firefox or Safari in the window chrome. You can see the screen size. You can see if there are console errors (if they have dev tools open, which some technical clients do).
Simplify your status system to match how clients actually think.
Clients don't need to know about priority levels (P0, P1, P2, P3). They don't care about severity classifications (Critical, Major, Minor, Trivial). They definitely don't need to see sprint assignments or story points or your internal workflow states.
They need to know three things: Did you see my bug report? Are you working on it? Is it fixed?
That translates to three statuses: Submitted. In Progress. Fixed.
That's it. Anything more complex is for your benefit, not theirs. Keep your internal complexity hidden. Show clients the simple version. They'll understand it immediately and you won't field questions about "what's the difference between P1 and P2?"
Default to asynchronous communication for bug reports.
When a client reports a bug, your instinct might be to say "let's jump on a quick call so you can show me." Don't do this.
That "quick call" will take 30 minutes minimum once you account for scheduling, small talk, and actually diagnosing the issue. You'll miss half of what they show you because you're taking notes instead of watching. You can't reference it later—you're working from memory and notes instead of the actual reproduction.
Instead, ask for a Loom video. They record it when convenient. You watch it when convenient, at 2x speed if you want. You can rewatch it to catch details you missed the first time. You have a permanent record you can reference later or share with your team.
This is faster for everyone and produces better results.
Real difference this makes:
Before switching to video bug reports: average 45 minutes to understand what a bug report actually means. Four to five email exchanges asking follow-up questions. Client gets frustrated because they feel like they already explained it. Issues are poorly documented because details get lost in email threads. Maybe 40% of bugs have enough information to actually work from.
After switching to video bug reports: average 5 minutes to understand the issue. Watch the video once. Client is happy because reporting the bug took them 30 seconds and didn't require explaining technical details. Issues are well documented because the video shows everything. 95% of bug reports have complete information.
The time savings are real. The reduction in client frustration is real. The improvement in bug documentation is real.
For my own freelance work, this is the stack: Lantern for bug tracking (built specifically for agencies). Sentry for JavaScript error monitoring (catches errors with full context). Loom free plan for clients to record videos (they use it, it works).
Total cost is around $15 per month. Time saved is 5-10 hours per week. The ROI is absurd.
How to actually implement this:
Week one: Set up your bug tracking system. Add your clients. Send them invites. They get a link to their portal.
Week two: First bug reports come in through the new system instead of email. If they send text descriptions, you ask for a Loom video. You fix the bug, mark it as resolved in the system. Client gets a notification.
Week three: It's become the habit. Clients default to using the portal instead of emailing you. Video reports are normal. Email bug reports have mostly stopped.
This timeline assumes you don't try to migrate all your old bugs from wherever they currently live (email, Trello, spreadsheets, your memory). Don't bother. Start fresh. Old bugs can stay where they are. New system is for new bugs. Trying to migrate everything just delays getting the benefit of the new system.
Common concerns:
"What if clients won't use the portal?" Politely redirect them: "Please submit this through the portal so I can track it properly and make sure it doesn't get lost." They'll adapt faster than you think. After they submit one or two bugs through the portal and see how smoothly it works, they prefer it to email.
"What about genuinely urgent bugs that need immediate attention?" The portal plus Slack notifications (or email notifications, or whatever you use) means you know instantly when a bug comes in. This is actually faster than refreshing your email hoping to catch urgent messages. The bug comes in, you get pinged, you look at it. Same workflow as email, except now it's organized.
"Do I need to migrate all my old bugs to the new system?" No. Don't waste time on this. Old bugs can stay in email or wherever they currently live. New system is for new bugs going forward. If you really need to reference an old bug later, it's still in email where you can find it. But trying to migrate everything just means you spend a week organizing historical bugs instead of getting value from the new system.
The whole point is to make bug reporting easier for clients and easier for you. Training clients to write better bug reports is hard and doesn't work. Building a system that makes it impossible to submit bad bug reports is easy and works immediately.
Set up Lantern free for 14 days and see if this approach works for your clients. If video bug reports don't save you time, something's deeply wrong with your workflow and you should figure that out. But they will save you time, and after two weeks you won't want to go back to email bug reports.
Get better bug reports automatically. No training clients required.