{"id":"pro-cs-outage-customer-status","audience":"customer-support","category":"summarizing","technique":"tone","title":"Turn an internal outage thread into a calm customer status note","free":false,"task":"Your app had a payment outage, and the internal incident thread is long and full of blame. You need a customer-facing status note of at most 3 sentences, plain text, with the current status first. Use the final resolution time, say what customers should do, and leave out internal names, blame and technical details. Write a prompt that gets you exactly that.","materialLabel":"Internal incident thread (attached to your prompt automatically)","material":"#incident-0412 - Payments failing - Tue Nov 18\n\n9:12 Priya (on-call): Card payments failing for ~30% of users. Error from processor.\n9:20 Marco: this is the config change Devon pushed last night, again 🙄\n9:25 Devon: it was approved in review, not just me\n9:40 Priya: rolled back the config. Failures down to 10%.\n10:05 Priya: processor says their side had a partial outage too. Waiting on them.\n10:30 Lena (support lead): we've got 340 tickets. What do we tell customers? Did anyone get double-charged?\n10:45 Priya: no double charges - failed payments were never captured. Customers just need to retry.\n11:20 Priya: processor fixed. All payments working since 11:15.\n11:22 Marco: should we blame the processor publicly? lol\n11:30 Lena: Customers whose orders failed between 8:50 and 11:15 should place the order again. We'll give a 10% code SORRY10 to anyone who writes in.\n12:00 Priya: Postmortem Thursday.","rules":[{"type":"maxSentences","max":3},{"type":"plainText"}],"mistakes":[{"title":"Starting with the problem","why":"The AI tells the story from the start, so customers read about failures first.","fix":"Add: \"First sentence: payments are working again.\"","checks":["r0"]},{"title":"Leaving out what to do","why":"The AI explains what happened but not what customers should do.","fix":"Add: \"Say no double charges, retry failed orders, and the SORRY10 code.\"","checks":["r1"]},{"title":"Copying internal details","why":"The AI includes names, blame and the config change.","fix":"Add: \"Customer-facing: no names, no blame, no technical details.\"","checks":["r2"]},{"title":"Asking for a summary","why":"The AI writes an incident report with headings.","fix":"Be exact: \"At most 3 sentences, plain text.\"","checks":["maxSentences","plainText"]}],"promptHints":[{"label":"Says who reads it","patterns":["customer","public","status (page|note)"]},{"label":"Puts status first","patterns":["first sentence","start with","working again","status first"]},{"label":"Bans blame and names","patterns":["no (names|blame)","internal","technical"]},{"label":"Says what to do","patterns":["retry","place.{0,10}again","double","sorry10","code"]},{"label":"Limits the sentences","patterns":["\\d+\\s*sentences?","(one|two|three|four|five) sentences?"]}],"hint":"Customers want to know it's fixed and what to do. Tell the AI that, and to leave every internal detail out.","rubricLabels":["The first sentence says payments are working again (since 11:15 am)","Tells customers that no one was double-charged, that orders which failed between 8:50 and 11:15 should be placed again, and mentions the SORRY10 code for those who write in","Contains no internal names, blame (config change, processor), ticket counts or technical details, and stays calm and apologetic without drama"]}