{"id":"risk-claims-review-table","audience":"compliance","category":"legal-compliance","track":"legal","technique":"format","level":"beginner","title":"Check product claims against substantiation notes in a table","free":false,"task":"You support the compliance team. Write a prompt that checks each claim on a product page against the substantiation notes. Ask for a markdown table with columns Claim | Status | Note, one row per claim in page order, under 130 words. Status is only Supported (notes back the exact wording), Not supported (notes have nothing or contradict) or Needs review (notes back it only in part). The last line must read exactly: For compliance review before publishing.","materialLabel":"Your material (attached to your prompt automatically)","material":"PRODUCT PAGE - AirNest 200 purifier (Brightleaf Home)\n1. Removes 99% of dust particles in 30 minutes\n2. The quietest purifier in its class\n3. Filter lasts up to 12 months\n4. Clinically proven to reduce allergies\n\nSUBSTANTIATION NOTES (compiled by Product Quality)\n- Test report TR-41, Norvale Testing Lab, March: 98.6% reduction of 0.3 micron test dust in 30 minutes, 20 square metre room, fan on high.\n- Noise: measured 32 dB on the low setting. No comparison to other brands' purifiers is on file.\n- Filter life: 12 months at 8 hours a day of use. At 24 hours a day the same filter lasted 5 months.\n- Allergy: no clinical study on file. An unpublished 2023 pilot with 14 staff members exists; results were not analysed.\n- The marketing team plans to publish the page on 20 November.","rules":[{"type":"maxWords","max":130}],"promptHints":[{"label":"Names the table columns","patterns":["table","claim\\s*\\|","columns?"]},{"label":"Defines the statuses","patterns":["not supported","needs review","supported"]},{"label":"Limits to the notes","patterns":["only (facts|the notes)","notes only","from the notes"]},{"label":"Sets the last line","patterns":["last line","exactly","for compliance review"]},{"label":"Caps words","patterns":["\\d+\\s*words","under \\d+"]}],"mistakes":[{"title":"Statuses invented","why":"AI uses its own labels like Partially supported or Unverified.","fix":"Say: \"Status is exactly one of Supported, Not supported or Needs review.\"","checks":["r0"]},{"title":"Rounding up the 98.6%","why":"AI treats 98.6% as close enough to 99%.","fix":"Say: \"Mark a claim Needs review when the notes back it only in part, and cite the figure.\"","checks":["r1"]},{"title":"No required closing line","why":"AI ends with its own advice or no line at all.","fix":"Say: \"Last line, exactly: For compliance review before publishing.\"","checks":["r2"]},{"title":"Trusting the AI to count words","why":"AI is bad at counting and usually runs long, so a vague \"keep it short\" lands over the limit.","fix":"Cap each part instead of the total, for example \"each line under 15 words\".","checks":["maxWords"]}],"hint":"Define the three statuses, the columns and the exact last line.","mission":"Check each claim against the notes in a status table.","musts":["Fixed three statuses","Notes cite figures","Required closing line"],"rubricLabels":["The table has columns Claim, Status and Note, with four rows in page order, and every Status is exactly Supported, Not supported or Needs review","Claim 1 (99% dust) is Needs review with a note citing 98.6%, and claim 4 (clinically proven) is Not supported","Claim 2 (quietest) is Not supported because no comparison is on file, claim 3 (12 months) is Needs review because it holds at 8 hours a day, and the last line reads exactly: For compliance review before publishing."]}