Module 03 / 10 · 40 planned minutes
Ask clearly; improve the answer
Write and revise a bounded prompt using a task, relevant material, a useful format and reviewable constraints.
Use AI01's small task and AI02's permission check to write a brief an assistant can follow. Learn to diagnose a weak result without memorising prompt jargon.
First pass: ask for one table from C03 and C04. Move on when your revised prompt addresses a specific failure and your output has been checked against the relevant paragraphs.
Learn 14 planned minutes
A useful instruction sounds like a useful brief
A prompt is the instruction or question you give an assistant. It can be short. For work with consequences, four ingredients usually help: the task, relevant context, the output you need and important boundaries. Use the ingredients that affect the result; a lengthy ritual is not required. OAIPROMPT
“Review this contract” leaves almost everything open. Are you summarising, negotiating, checking against a playbook or researching enforceability? Who will read the result? What source set and jurisdiction apply? Is the output an internal draft or a client communication? The assistant may fill those gaps in ways you did not intend.
A better starting point is: “Using C03 and C04 only, compare the service period and support promise. Show each source's wording and paragraph, then questions for the supervising lawyer. Do not decide enforceability or prepare acceptance.”
For a legal research task, add jurisdiction, relevant date, factual assumptions, intended source types and what you can actually verify. For a rewrite, say what must remain unchanged. An instruction such as “act as a senior lawyer” neither grants legal competence nor substitutes for the source material.
Add context carefully
Give the smallest relevant source set and identify each document's status. A template shows format; an example shows what a useful answer looks like. Label examples separately from the facts of the current matter. Otherwise an assistant can carry a name, date or result from the example into the new work.
If required information is missing, ask the assistant to identify the gap before proceeding. Do not ask twenty speculative questions when one missing signed version is the blocker. If the conversation has become confused, start a fresh one with the current brief and authorised source list. Persistent preferences do not override the specific matter instructions.
Improve one thing at a time
Read the first answer and identify its largest problem: a false fact, omitted exception, wrong format, unsupported legal conclusion or unnecessary length. Give a specific follow-up: “The source promises acknowledgement, not restoration. Correct that distinction and keep the checked price unchanged.”
Ask for a concise rationale, source locations and explicit assumptions. Do not treat an elaborate explanation of supposed reasoning as evidence. The useful question is whether the conclusion is supported and the steps you can observe are sound. Nor is the model's answer to “Are you sure?” an independent check. ANTHROPIC
Set a reasonable effort limit. After two unhelpful revisions, inspect the source and task yourself, reduce the scope or use the manual route. Being fluent includes recognising when further prompting costs more than it helps.
Worked example
Separate fictional source: “Monthly fee: KES 5,000, excluding tax. No setup fee.”
Weak prompt: “Make this clearer.” Candidate response: “Your total cost is only KES 5,000, all included.”
Better prompt: “Rewrite this fee statement for an internal update in one sentence. Preserve the monthly frequency, tax exclusion and absence of a setup fee; add no assurance about total costs.”
Checked result: “The stated charge is KES 5,000 per month excluding tax, with no setup fee in the supplied extract.” The improvement came from identifying the material details, not using a special incantation.
Practise 20 planned minutes
Guided practice
Write a first prompt for C03/C04. Run it in the approved route or inspect S03. Name one failure and revise the prompt. Use source paragraphs to check the revised result. If your first prompt works well, change the audience or request a shorter format while preserving the same facts.
Feedback — compare after your attempt
The signed extract describes a six-month service and acknowledgement within four business hours; the email describes an annual package and a different support outcome. Your prompt should preserve that distinction without deciding whether the email changes legal rights. “Make this standard” is not a sufficient objective or evidence of an agreed position.
Practice assignment
Complete A03 with the original prompt, one observed problem, the revised prompt and a short checked result. In simulation, disclose the supplied responses. Add one reason your method could be reused and one piece of case context that must change next time. Keep the whole box within 200 words.
Participation
Swap only the fictional prompt with a partner and ask what result they would expect. Solo alternative: underline every ambiguous word and replace one with a concrete instruction.
Check 6 planned minutes
Two formative checks. Choose an answer, then check it or open the comparison. Retry freely; this is not an award or an observed-skill record.
Source study and completion check
Optional pointer: OAIPROMPT, “Add useful context” and “Improve the result with follow-up messages”. Identify one useful constraint and one unnecessary instruction in your own prompt. Complete AI03's two checks.
Before moving on, compare your artifact with the module feedback, correct material errors and keep its actual route label. This page does not record or certify completion.