Write formal, friendly, and brief versions of a message
Автор: AILesson5 мин на настройкуПроверено на:ChatGPTПроверено: 2026-08-28
Быстрый ответ
Create three genuinely different registers while holding facts, authority, conditions, and requested action constant. Укажите: Facts and intended message, Recipient and relationship, Channel and invariant rules. Ожидаемый результат: Three channel-ready variants with use guidance and an invariant comparison.
1
Добавьте контекст
ваш текст остаётся в этом браузере. AILesson Prompts не отправляет его ни в модель, ни на сервер.
2
Ваш промпт
Незаполненные поля остаются видимыми как заполнители, поэтому вы всё равно можете скопировать и отредактировать промпт
Create formal, friendly, and brief versions of the same message.
Facts, decision, request, reasons, timing, conditions, unknowns, and source wording:
[message]
Recipient role, relationship, authority, locale, sensitivity, context, and prior knowledge:
[audience]
Channels/lengths, fixed facts, commitments, refusals, legal wording, confidentiality, action, and forbidden changes:
[rules]
First define the semantic invariants. Vary only greeting, formality, warmth, sentence structure, amount of context, transitions, and closing. Formal must not become colder or more legalistic than requested; friendly must not add praise, apology, flexibility, emojis, or offers that are unsupported; brief must not omit a condition, refusal, uncertainty, deadline, or response path. Preserve actors, authority, modality, scope, numbers, dates, causality, and confidentiality in all three. If the specified channels require materially different information, flag the conflict instead of pretending the versions are equivalent. Return: formal version; friendly version; brief version; best-use guidance for each; line-by-line invariant audit; rhetorical differences; and any detail too important to shorten.
Конфиденциально по умолчаниюПромпт собирается локально в вашем браузере. Не вводите конфиденциальную информацию в сервисы ИИ, если ваша организация этого не разрешает.
От исходных данных к результату
Разобранный пример
Посмотрите, как конкретный контекст превращает этот рецепт в полезный результат
Реальный ввод
Facts and intended message
The team cannot add the requested analytics export to the 12 September release because scope closed on 20 August. It may be evaluated for the 10 October release after Data Governance approves the field definitions. Ask Priya to send the definitions and named data owner by 5 September. Evaluation is not a commitment to October. Existing manual CSV export remains available. Security review details are internal and must not be forwarded.
Recipient and relationship
Internal department director who submitted the request. Product manager has authority over release scope but not Data Governance approval. They know the release calendar and use both email and Teams. Relationship is constructive but the director may read soft wording as negotiable.
Channel and invariant rules
Formal: email, 130 words max. Friendly: direct Teams message, 100 words max, warm but firm, no emoji. Brief: status-thread reply, 55 words max. Keep every date, current manual alternative, governance condition, no-October-commitment, Priya action, named data owner, and confidentiality. Do not apologize, blame scope process, reopen September, promise evaluation result, or offer extra work.
The analytics export cannot be added to the 12 September release because scope closed on 20 August. It may be evaluated for the 10 October release after Data Governance approves the field definitions; evaluation does not commit the item to October.
Please ask Priya to send the definitions and name the data owner by 5 September. Until a future release is confirmed, the existing manual CSV export remains available. Security-review details are internal and must not be forwarded.
Friendly Teams: Thanks for raising the analytics export request. The 12 September scope closed on 20 August, so it cannot be added there. After Data Governance approves the field definitions, we can evaluate it for 10 October, but that is not a release commitment. Please have Priya send the definitions and named data owner by 5 September. The manual CSV export remains available. Please keep the security-review details internal.
Brief thread: Not in the 12 Sep release; scope closed 20 Aug. After Data Governance approves field definitions, we may evaluate 10 Oct—no commitment. Priya: send definitions + named data owner by 5 Sep. Manual CSV remains available. Security-review details stay internal.
Use formal for durable decision record, friendly for direct coordination, brief where the thread already supplies context. Audit: all three preserve exclusion, reasons, dates, conditional October evaluation, no commitment, Priya's two inputs, manual alternative, and confidentiality.
Почему это работает
1
Defining invariants before writing prevents register changes from becoming policy or commitment changes.
2
Use guidance makes the variants operational choices rather than arbitrary rewrites.
Проверьте результат
Do all versions preserve actors, authority, decisions, conditions, dates, scope, uncertainty, and requested response?
Are warmth and brevity achieved without adding offers, approval, apology, urgency, or flexibility?
Does the guidance explain a real channel or relationship reason to choose each version?
Используйте уверенно
Часто задаваемые вопросы
Практические ответы о том, когда использовать этот рецепт, что нужно предоставить и где по-прежнему важна проверка человеком
What should I prepare before using “Write formal, friendly, and brief versions of a message”?
For “Write formal, friendly, and brief versions of a message,” prepare Facts and intended message, Recipient and relationship, and Channel and invariant rules. 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 “Write formal, friendly, and brief versions of a message” result not ready to use?
The result is not ready if it does not yet deliver the stated outcome—Three channel-ready variants with use guidance and an invariant comparison—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 “Write formal, friendly, and brief versions of a message”?
The published test record for “Write formal, friendly, and brief versions of a message” 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.
Перейдите от понимания ИИ к выполнению задач. Практикуйтесь в составлении запросов, проверке и улучшении результатов с помощью интерактивных уроков для работы и повседневной жизни.
ChatGPT
