First-party field notes ·
A finished meeting note and action table
Keep decisions, owners and unanswered questions visible.
Complete teaching outcome + historical prompt check
From notes to a finished outcome
Read the full fictional material, then compare it with the finished deliverable. The labels beside each claim point back to a source line.
Teaching outcome authored with a Codex agent on 2026-10-13. Fictional inputs; both language versions were prepared in this session. This is an authored sample, not a retained AI run transcript. No Claude or LM Studio run, human review, or measured quality improvement is claimed.
· A finished meeting note and action table
1. Full fictional source notes
[M1] Fictional community workshop planning meeting. The meeting date and calendar week were not supplied. [M2] Decision: use the library room for the workshop. The room is selected; the booking is not yet confirmed. [M3] Member A will confirm the booking by Friday. No calendar date was supplied for Friday. [M4] Member B will draft the invitation. No deadline was agreed. [M5] The team will confirm room capacity. Capacity is unknown; no owner or deadline was agreed for this action. [M6] An accessibility check was proposed, but no decision was made to carry it out.
2. Instruction used to author this outcome
Use only the fictional notes M1–M6 below. Produce a finished meeting note in English: Decisions; an action table with Action / Owner / Deadline / Source; Open questions; Proposals not agreed. Cite the source IDs for each item. Keep the selected room separate from a confirmed booking. Keep Friday as Friday; do not invent a calendar date. Use Not agreed for unknown owners or deadlines. Treat the accessibility check as a proposal, not an assigned action. Do not book anything or send messages. Return the deliverable, not a plan for writing it. [M1] Fictional community workshop planning meeting. The meeting date and calendar week were not supplied. [M2] Decision: use the library room for the workshop. The room is selected; the booking is not yet confirmed. [M3] Member A will confirm the booking by Friday. No calendar date was supplied for Friday. [M4] Member B will draft the invitation. No deadline was agreed. [M5] The team will confirm room capacity. Capacity is unknown; no owner or deadline was agreed for this action. [M6] An accessibility check was proposed, but no decision was made to carry it out.
3. Finished deliverable
## Decisions - Use the library room for the workshop; booking confirmation is still pending. [M2] ## Actions | Action | Owner | Deadline | Source | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Confirm the booking | Member A | Friday (calendar date not supplied) | M3 | | Draft the invitation | Member B | Not agreed | M4 | | Confirm room capacity | Not agreed | Not agreed | M5 | ## Open questions - What is the meeting date, and which calendar date does Friday refer to? [M1, M3] - What deadline should the invitation draft have? [M4] - What is the room capacity, and who will confirm it by when? [M5] ## Proposals not agreed - Accessibility check: proposed, with no decision to carry it out. [M6]
4. Check against the source
These checks explain how to inspect this sample. Source references are an aid, not an automatic factual review of your own output.
- The library room is selected; the note does not say it is already booked. [M2]
- The booking action belongs to Member A and says Friday without an invented date. [M1, M3]
- The invitation belongs to Member B; its deadline remains Not agreed. [M4]
- Capacity stays unknown; the capacity action has no invented owner or deadline. [M5]
- The accessibility check appears only as an unagreed proposal. [M6]
5. Teaching counterexample and repair
Deliberately wrong teaching sample · not a model failure log
The library room is booked. Member B will finish the invitation by Friday. Member A will confirm capacity by Friday and carry out the accessibility check.
This deliberately written counterexample changes pending booking into completion (M2), borrows a deadline for the invitation (M4), assigns an unknown owner and deadline (M5), and turns a proposal into work (M6). It is not an observed model failure.
Correction instruction
Recheck the draft against M1–M6. Replace the booked claim with selected, booking pending. Keep Friday only for Member A’s booking action. Restore Not agreed for the invitation deadline and the capacity owner/deadline. Move the accessibility check to Proposals not agreed. Return all four sections with source IDs, leaving every other supported fact intact.
Corrected complete result
Applying the correction to the teaching counterexample restores the complete deliverable below. It matches the source-backed sample above.
## Decisions - Use the library room for the workshop; booking confirmation is still pending. [M2] ## Actions | Action | Owner | Deadline | Source | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Confirm the booking | Member A | Friday (calendar date not supplied) | M3 | | Draft the invitation | Member B | Not agreed | M4 | | Confirm room capacity | Not agreed | Not agreed | M5 | ## Open questions - What is the meeting date, and which calendar date does Friday refer to? [M1, M3] - What deadline should the invitation draft have? [M4] - What is the room capacity, and who will confirm it by when? [M5] ## Proposals not agreed - Accessibility check: proposed, with no decision to carry it out. [M6]
The existing starter uses shorter fictional notes. Replace them with your own non-sensitive material, generate an instruction in your chosen tool format, and compare its answer with the source.
Earlier local prompt-generation check · 2026-10-07
The record below checks only the helper’s instruction generation. It is separate from the Codex-assisted teaching outcome above and contains no external AI task result.
What changed in the instruction
This compares structure, not the quality of an AI answer. More fields do not guarantee a better result.
Original requestSummarize these meeting notes.
| Refined fields | Short direct request | Helper instruction |
|---|---|---|
| Goal | Supplied | Supplied |
| Materials | Missing | Supplied |
| Constraints | Missing | Supplied |
| Output format | Missing | Supplied |
| Acceptance criteria | Missing | Supplied |
Historical technical evidence
Sign in for historical reproduction evidence
Historical reproduction records and raw evidence downloads require an active account. New worked teaching examples, their checks and sample downloads stay open without registration.
What still needs a person
After an AI answers, compare every decision and action with the original notes. A plausible name or date is not evidence.
We did not send these instructions to Claude, Codex or LM Studio. We did not evaluate completed meeting notes, recommendations or digests. Automated hints cannot verify facts or guarantee safe output.