Write & communicate

Write a post-meeting confirmation email

Confirm what was decided, assigned, and left open without upgrading discussion into agreement

4 min setupTested with:ChatGPTReviewed: 2026-08-28

Add your context

Your text stays in this browser. AILesson Prompts does not send it to a model or server.

Meeting notesRecipients and contextReply and tone rules

Your prompt

Unfilled fields remain visible as placeholders, so you can still copy and edit the prompt

Write a post-meeting email confirming decisions and next steps.

Meeting notes:
[notes]

Recipients, attendance, and required confirmations:
[recipients]

Tone, correction deadline, and unresolved-item rules:
[style]

Use only the notes. Separate confirmed decisions, proposed options, actions, and open questions. Preserve exact owners, dates, dependencies, conditions, and dissent. Write Owner not specified or Due date not specified where needed; do not assign work by inference. Make corrections easy by asking recipients to identify inaccuracies by the stated time, but do not treat silence as approval unless that rule was explicitly agreed. Return: subject, concise email, and missing-information checklist.

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

Meeting notes: 18 June website launch meeting. Decided: keep 8 July public launch if accessibility testing passes. Noor will deliver revised keyboard-navigation fixes by 24 June. Eli will run the retest; no date assigned. Marketing suggested announcing on 1 July, but the group did not decide. Open: who makes the final go/no-go call and what severity of accessibility issue blocks launch. Rosa disagreed with announcing before retest completion.
Recipients and context: All six attendees, including Rosa; the project sponsor did not attend. Recipients should verify the record and clarify ownership gaps.
Reply and tone rules: Neutral and concise. Ask for factual corrections by 20 June 17:00, but explicitly say open questions still require replies.

Example output

Subject: 18 June launch meeting—decisions and open items

Hi all,

Here is my record of the 18 June meeting.

Decision: retain the 8 July public launch, conditional on accessibility testing passing.

Actions: Noor—deliver revised keyboard-navigation fixes by 24 June. Eli—run the accessibility retest; due date not specified.

Not decided: Marketing proposed a 1 July announcement. Rosa opposed announcing before the retest is complete.

Replies still needed: who owns the final go/no-go decision; what issue severity blocks launch; and the retest due date. Please send factual corrections to this record by 20 June at 17:00. Silence will not resolve the open questions.

Thanks, [Sender name]

Missing information: sender name, retest date, go/no-go owner, blocking threshold, and whether the absent sponsor must approve.

Why this works

1
Separating decisions from proposals prevents a polished recap from creating false commitments.
2
Visible missing owners and dates turn documentation gaps into concrete follow-up.