GPT 6 guide: from request to reviewed result

A GPT 6 guide built around one meeting

This GPT 6 guide follows the “Meeting notes to actions” template through a concrete workshop-planning example. The input is twelve numbered notes containing decisions, suggestions, owners, dates and unresolved details. The model task is to turn those notes into a decision log and action list without inventing assignments.

The run uses GPT-6 Astra at medium effort in Codex. The full input and original response are available in the meeting prompt example. This page focuses on how to prepare and inspect the task, so you do not need to read the same output twice.

Step 1: Decide what the answer must preserve

Before running the prompt, identify three confirmed decisions: the workshop is on September 19 from 14:00 to 16:00, capacity is 24, and existing supplies will be reused. Paid advertisements are only a proposal. The projector remains unresolved. Those distinctions are more important than whether the response uses an elegant table.

The input also contains five action candidates. Bo must reserve the hall by September 9; Ada prepares the page by September 10 after the booking is confirmed; Chen checks inventory by September 8. The accessibility check has a September 11 deadline but no owner. Bo’s reminder has an owner but no deadline. A useful answer retains both gaps instead of assigning a plausible name or date.

Step 2: Supply a small, numbered source

Keep the meeting notes together and number each entry. Separate your instructions from the source. If a note says “suggested,” do not rewrite it as “agreed” while preparing the input. Add the reference date and spell out time zones when they affect deadlines.

For your own meeting, replace the source placeholder in the complete prompt below. Include the participant list only when it helps resolve actual names or roles. You do not need to supply an entire inbox to extract five actions from one meeting.

Step 3: Ask for fields you can compare

The template requests a decision log, action items, open questions and a follow-up message draft. Each item should point back to a note. Missing owners or deadlines remain explicit. The output is a preparation aid; the synthetic example does not send a real follow-up message.

Review the log before reading the prose summary. Tables expose an invented assignment or missing dependency more clearly than a polished paragraph. Check that the page task still depends on the hall booking and that the accessibility item remains unassigned.

Step 4: Compare the output with the source

Check	Expected result in this example
Decisions	Date/time, capacity and reuse of supplies are confirmed
Proposals	Paid advertisements stay outside confirmed decisions
Actions	Five source-backed actions, with missing fields preserved
Dependency	Ada’s page follows the hall booking
Open questions	Projector and unresolved action fields remain visible
External action	A draft only; no email or other message is sent

The linked run records the actual check findings and any changes after the first response. If your own run differs, save that response before editing it. Correct the specific row or input ambiguity, then repeat the affected check.

Apply the same GPT 6 guide elsewhere

For a venue decision, define capacity as a mandatory condition before comparing weighted scores. For research, attach source IDs and keep conflicting dates distinct. For code, give the expected result and run a reproduction. For document formatting, preserve the source file and compare its objects after export.

The examples collection shows these methods with downloadable files and browser outcomes. The access guide helps if you need to identify the product and model before beginning. The complete reusable meeting instruction below uses the same source text as the prompt library and its recorded experiment.

Task
Convert messy meeting notes into accountable follow-up.

Instructions
Process these meeting notes: [NOTES]. Extract decisions, open questions, action items, owner, due date, and dependencies. Preserve uncertainty when the notes do not assign an owner or date. Quote a short source phrase for each decision.

Expected output
Decisions, action table, unresolved questions, and a follow-up message draft.

Checks
- No owner is invented.
- Dates are copied or marked unknown.
- Decisions are traceable to notes.