Author: AILesson8 min setupTested with:ChatGPTReviewed: 2026-08-28
Quick answer
Normalize price, quantity, quality, fees, conditions, timing, rewards, returns, and unused volume before comparing savings. Provide: Promotion and regular offers, Actual need and use pattern, Comparison method. Expected result: A like-for-like promotion comparison with effective cost, break-even use, caveats, and verification questions.
1
Add your context
Your text stays in this browser. AILesson Prompts does not send it to a model or server.
2
Your prompt
Unfilled fields remain visible as placeholders, so you can still copy and edit the prompt
Check whether the promotion is better than the regular offer for the supplied real need. A discount label or reference price is not proof of savings.
Exact offers, seller, model/quality, quantities, prices, dates, fees, taxes, shipping, memberships, coupons, gifts, financing, returns, expiry, and sources:
[offers]
Required quantity/timing, use rate, storage, spoilage, substitution, cash budget, stock, and value of extras:
[use]
Currency/date, cost basis, price history, reward valuation, opportunity cost, verification date, and decision rule:
[method]
Verify that options are identical or state differences. Normalize total cash paid, unavoidable fees/tax/shipping/membership, usable quantity, unit and per-use cost, timing, return/warranty, and quality. Treat coupons, points, gifts, bundles, subscriptions, financing, and future credits at zero unless the user supplies a defensible redemption/use value; show them separately. Do not accept a crossed-out MSRP or seller reference price as the regular baseline without dated evidence. Calculate break-even usable quantity and the cost of excess, expiry, storage, lock-in, delayed cash, and forfeited flexibility. Return a source table, formulas, base and downside cases, arithmetic reconciliation, promotion traps, better/no-better/no-decision conclusion, and questions to verify immediately before purchase.
Private by defaultPrompt assembly happens locally in your browser. Avoid placing confidential information into any AI service unless your organization allows it.
From input to outcome
A worked example
See how concrete context turns this recipe into a usable result
Actual input
Promotion and regular offers
Same Brand Q dishwasher tablets, same seller and formula. Regular: box 30 for CNY 48, free pickup, return unopened within 7 days. Promotion 28–30 Aug: three boxes of 30 for CNY 126 plus CNY 8 delivery unless order reaches 149; includes 300 store points expiring 30 Sep, seller calls regular value 144. Adding unrelated goods only to waive shipping is not desired. Both prices include tax. Promotion return requires whole bundle unopened; regular stock source is seller page checked 28 Aug. Historical price evidence: user receipt 15 Jul shows one box 45, not 48.
Actual need and use pattern
Household uses 8 tablets/month, has 18 already, storage dry for about six months only; no confirmed product expiry, but user wants at most nine months' supply. Cash budget 150. Points are unlikely to be used before expiry, value zero. No quality difference.
Comparison method
CNY, compare cash paid and tablets likely used within nine months from today, including existing stock. Regular baseline show both current 48 and dated receipt 45; do not claim full price history. Excess tablets valued zero. Decide promotion only if lower effective cost for usable tablets and within quantity cap.
Example output
Nine-month need is 72 tablets; existing 18 leaves 54 to buy. Promotion forces 90 new tablets, producing 108 on hand—36 above the stated nine-month cap. If only 54 promotion tablets are usable in the decision window, cash paid is 126+8=134 and effective usable cost is 134/54=CNY 2.48; points are zero. The nominal bundle unit cost 134/90=CNY 1.49 hides excess.
Regular option requires two boxes, 60 new tablets, yielding 78 on hand—6 above the nine-month need. At current CNY 48, cash is 96 and effective cost over the 54 needed tablets is CNY 1.78; using the 15 Jul receipt price only as a dated alternative baseline, two boxes would have been 90 and CNY 1.67 per needed tablet. Regular therefore uses less cash, stays much closer to the cap, and preserves separate-box return flexibility.
Conclusion under the user's rule: promotion is not better. The seller's 144 reference equals 3×48 but does not prove long-run regular value; the dated receipt contradicts it as a universal baseline. Before buying, verify current single-box availability, product expiry/storage, exact delivery and return terms. Break-even versus two current boxes would require the bundle's usable value to exceed its CNY 38 extra cash, which cannot occur here when excess and points are valued zero.
Why this works
1
Usable-unit and cash-paid normalization exposes savings that depend on waste, fees, or future redemption.
2
A dated regular-price baseline prevents seller reference prices from creating fictitious discounts.
Check the result
Are product, seller, quality, quantity, time, tax, fees, return, and warranty truly comparable?
Are rewards and extras separated from cash savings and valued only when likely usable?
Does the decision use actual usable quantity, dated baseline evidence, downside waste, and break-even use?
Use it with confidence
Frequently asked questions
Practical answers about when to use this recipe, what to provide, and where human review still matters
What should I prepare before using “Check whether a promotion beats the regular offer”?
For “Check whether a promotion beats the regular offer,” prepare Promotion and regular offers, Actual need and use pattern, and Comparison method. Replace placeholders only with information you can verify. If a detail is unknown, preserve that uncertainty explicitly instead of asking the model to infer it.
When is the “Check whether a promotion beats the regular offer” result not ready to use?
The result is not ready if it does not yet deliver the stated outcome—A like-for-like promotion comparison with effective cost, break-even use, caveats, and verification questions—from the supplied evidence, or if it relies on unresolved assumptions, missing approvals, or invented details. Use the checks as release gates: revise the source inputs or assign a named, authorized reviewer instead of polishing an unsupported output.
Which AI tools have recorded tests for “Check whether a promotion beats the regular offer”?
The published test record for “Check whether a promotion beats the regular offer” lists ChatGPT as of 2026-08-28. This confirms recorded runs, not guaranteed compatibility or identical results in later product versions. For another tool or version, keep every constraint visible and repeat the result checks before use.
ChatGPT