Concrete workplace scenario
A manager says: “Can you use AI to handle this customer escalation and tell me what we should do?”
It sounds like a prompt-writing task. The trap is that the work is not ready for AI until you know the owner, usable input, risk, and stop condition.
Worked answer
Bad example first: the request sounds useful, but the task is not fit yet
Weak example
“Read this escalation and decide the best response for the customer.”
What goes wrong
The prompt asks AI to decide the best response with no owner named, unknown evidence, and no stop condition.
Work-ready version: check fit before prompting
Fit to draft
AI can draft a neutral summary if the input is safe and approved.
Fit to prepare
AI can list missing facts, options, and questions for the owner.
Not fit to decide
AI must not own the escalation outcome or customer-impact decision.
Quick decision check
The fit-before-prompt rule
Before you prompt, check four things: owner, input, risk, and stop. If one is missing, repair the task before asking AI to produce output.
Owner
Who owns the outcome?
Input
What can AI safely use?
Risk
What could go wrong?
Stop
Where must AI stop?
Task-fit trace
This is the small visible work change from today. Keep it shallow, real, and reusable tomorrow.
Before / after: what changed in your work?
Use this small contrast to see what changed today. The goal is not more paperwork; it is a clearer AI-in-workflow move.
Before learning
After learning
What AI-in-workflow means today
Build today's artifact rows
Complete three short fill-ins. Keep one real work item per row, and change the sample wording so it fits your work.
| No. | Work item | AI role / prompt case | Risk or evidence | Human owner / reader | Next action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | |||||
| 2 | |||||
| 3 |
Repair one weak row
Use this pass to find the row that could confuse someone, create unsafe AI use, or fail as workplace evidence before you export.
Repair example
Weak row: Ask AI to handle customer escalation.
Repair move: Add owner, safe input, risk, and stop condition.
Better row: AI may summarize escalation notes; support lead owns the customer decision; AI stops before refund or policy promise.
Choose the row you would be comfortable showing to a manager. It should have a clear task, boundary, owner, and next action.
Choose the row most likely to fail, confuse someone, expose sensitive input, or need review.
Write the exact change. Sentence starter: The weak row is weak because ___. I will repair it by adding ___ before using AI.
Pass / fix / stop standard
Do not prompt AI to complete a task before owner, input, risk, and stop condition are clear.
Export artifact
This file is today’s work receipt. It should show what changed in your work habit, not just that you filled a table.
Before you export
- Does each row name the owner?
- Does it say what input AI can safely use?
- Does it define where AI must stop?
What this artifact proves: This file proves you checked owner, input, risk, and stop condition before prompting AI.
Weak export: vague rows, no owner, no repair note, or no next-use line.
Good export: one clear work case, one boundary/rule, one repair note, and one tomorrow-use or manager-use line.
Click Generate Markdown to create task_fit_decision_note.md.