I have been asked to sign an employment agreement which includes
The Employee irrevocably appoints the Employer as the Employee’s lawful and authorised attorney to sign a document or do any thing and generally to use the Employee’s name so as to give to the Employer the full benefit of this clause.
in the clause relating to Intellectual Property.
My main concern here is that
so as to reads to me as if it was an example of possible usage, and not a limitation of authorisation. Something along the lines of "appoint us as your attorney so we can sign paperwork, such as those required for this clause, on your behalf."
Using the example from https://english.stackexchange.com/a/129573
Ensure that the firewall is properly configured so as to prevent an attacker from infiltrating our network.
could seem to support this since a "properly configured firewall" can do more than just protect your network from infiltration.
If the phrase
for the purposes of was used instead it would read as though authorisation was being granted, but would be restricted to this one specific use case.
In terms of legal documents (and probably everywhere else?) does
so as to restrict the authorisation to only the provided purpose?