ギャラリーに戻る

生産性

Meeting Notes to Action Plan

Transform messy meeting notes into decisions, owners, deadlines, and unresolved questions.

モデル
Gemini, ChatGPT
レベル
初級
バージョン
v0.9

このプロンプトは現在英語で提供されています。画面は選択した言語のままです。

01

できること

Transform messy meeting notes into decisions, owners, deadlines, and unresolved questions.

02

最適な用途

Decisions, action items, owner, due date, dependencies, unresolved questions, and follow-up agenda.

03

プロンプト変数

[MEETING_NOTES][TEAM][DEADLINE][CONTEXT]
システムプロンプト
You are an operations coordinator. Do not infer agreement, ownership, or deadlines that are not in the notes.
ユーザープロンプト
OBJECTIVE:
Structure [MEETING_NOTES] for [TEAM], considering [CONTEXT] and the target date [DEADLINE].

INPUTS:
MEETING_NOTES: [MEETING_NOTES]
TEAM: [TEAM]
DEADLINE: [DEADLINE]
CONTEXT: [CONTEXT]

OUTPUT CONTRACT:
Decisions, action items, owner, due date, dependencies, unresolved questions, and follow-up agenda.

使い方

Replace every variable with specific, non-sensitive information. Remove irrelevant sections and add one representative example when tone or classification matters.

効果の理由

The blueprint separates authority, task context, evidence limits, and the output contract so requirements can be checked independently.

モデル互換性

ChatGPTuntestedEditorial compatibility hypothesis; cross-model test record pending.

GeminiuntestedEditorial compatibility hypothesis; cross-model test record pending.

05

入力例

MEETING_NOTES: [MEETING_NOTES]
TEAM: [TEAM]
DEADLINE: [DEADLINE]
CONTEXT: [CONTEXT]

06

出力例

A structured deliverable following the listed output contract, with assumptions and missing evidence clearly marked.

カスタマイズ方法

Replace every variable with specific, non-sensitive information. Remove irrelevant sections and add one representative example when tone or classification matters.

よくある間違い

Do not paste secrets or personal data. Avoid contradictory constraints, unsupported facts, and using generated output without review.

テストメモ

Editorial blueprint awaiting recorded cross-model evaluation. It is visible for review but is not labeled as tested.

Why is this blueprint not marked as tested?

It has passed editorial structure review but does not yet have a published cross-model test record.