Researcher or analyst

Answer in [ANSWER LANGUAGE], even if the material below is in another language.

You are translating for a civil society organisation. Translate the text below from [SOURCE LANGUAGE] into [TARGET LANGUAGE].

Rules:
1. Translate the meaning, not word by word. Keep the register formal and plain.
2. Add nothing, remove nothing, soften nothing. If the source is vague, stay vague.
3. Copy every name, number, date and quotation exactly as it appears in the source. Keep each number in the digit form the source uses, and say so where the source mixes digits: ١٢٣ alongside 123.
4. The first time a legal or technical term appears, put the original word in brackets after your translation.
5. Mark anything you are unsure about with [CHECK] inside the translation.

Give me, in this order:
A. The translation.
B. A table with two columns: the source term, and the wording you chose for it.
C. Every [CHECK] you marked, with one line each saying why.

If you are reading on a phone, replace the table with one block per row: a heading line, then one short labelled line per column.

Text to translate:
[PASTE THE TEXT]

Answer in [ANSWER LANGUAGE], even if the material below is in another language.

Read the document below and write a brief for a colleague who has not read it.

Rules:
1. Use only what is in the document. Add nothing from your own knowledge. If you are not sure whether something is in it, leave it out.
2. Every point must name the page, article or section it comes from.
3. Quote the exact wording for anything that could be disputed.
4. Copy every number and date in the digit form the document uses, and flag it where the document mixes digits: ١٢٣ alongside 123.
5. Do not soften and do not dramatise.

Give me, in this order:
A. What this document is, in one sentence: who wrote it, when, and what it decides or reports.
B. The ten most important points, one line each, each with its page or section. Carry every number, date and deadline inside the point it belongs to, each with its own page.
C. What the document does NOT say that a reader would expect it to.
D. Three questions this document leaves open.

Document:
[PASTE THE DOCUMENT]

Answer in [ANSWER LANGUAGE], even if the material below is in another language.

Below is a machine transcript of a recorded interview, and it stays on my own computer, so work only with what is here and keep the whole answer local. Clean it up for reading.

You may:
- Fix punctuation, capitalisation and the obvious spelling of the names I list below.
- Remove filler sounds and repeated false starts.
- Keep the speaker labels exactly as they are.

You may NOT:
- Complete an unfinished sentence.
- Replace a word you think was misheard.
- Reorder anything.
- Remove a repetition that carries meaning.

Keep every [inaudible] marker and its timestamp where it is.

Give me, in this order:
A. The cleaned transcript.
B. A list of every change you made that was more than punctuation, with the original wording beside it.
C. The lines you could not make sense of, quoted, so a person can listen again.

Names and terms spelled correctly: [LIST THE NAMES AND PLACES]

Transcript:
[PASTE THE TRANSCRIPT]

Answer in [ANSWER LANGUAGE], even if the material below is in another language.

Below are notes from several sources, with names and identifying details already removed. Build a timeline from them.

Rules:
1. Use only what the notes say. Infer nothing. Never calculate or guess a date.
2. One row per event. If two notes describe the same event, merge them into one row and list both sources.
3. If an event has no date, it goes in the undated list, not in the table.
4. Mark each row STATED if the note gives the date, or UNCLEAR if the note is ambiguous about it.
5. Copy each date in the form the note wrote it. Where the notes mix digits, ١٢٣ alongside 123, or write one date two ways, keep both and mark the row UNCLEAR.
6. Name people only by the label the notes use. Never replace a label with a real name.

Give me, in this order:
A. A table with these columns: date, what happened, where, who the note names, source note, STATED or UNCLEAR.
B. Undated events, as a list, each with its source note.
C. Contradictions between the notes, quoted on both sides.
D. What a reader would need next to close each contradiction.

If you are reading on a phone, replace the table with one block per row: a heading line, then one short labelled line per column.

Notes:
[PASTE THE REDACTED NOTES]

Answer in [ANSWER LANGUAGE], even if the material below is in another language.

Below are two versions of the same law, regulation or bill. Version 1 is the older one. Version 2 is the newer one.

Rules:
1. Compare them article by article. Quote the exact wording on both sides.
2. Report only what changed. Do not summarise what stayed the same.
3. Say what each change does in practice, in one plain sentence. No political comment.
4. If an article was renumbered but its wording is the same, write RENUMBERED. Do not report it as removed.
5. Article numbers may arrive in mixed digits: ١٢٣ alongside 123. Treat ١٢ and 12 as the same article.
6. If a change is ambiguous, say so and give both readings. If neither version settles a point, write "the document does not say" instead of filling the gap.

Give me, in this order:
A. A table: article, wording in version 1, wording in version 2, what it changes in practice, who it affects.
B. Articles removed or added. One line each, marked REMOVED or ADDED, with the article number and its subject.
C. The three changes that most affect civil society organisations, and why.
D. Anything you could not compare because the numbering differs.

If you are reading on a phone, replace the table with one block per row: a heading line, then one short labelled line per column.

Version 1:
[PASTE THE OLDER VERSION]

Version 2:
[PASTE THE NEWER VERSION]

Answer in [ANSWER LANGUAGE], even if the material below is in another language.

Below is a list of published items from this week: headline, outlet, date, and a link or a short extract for each.

Rules:
1. Use only the items below. Add no background from your own knowledge.
2. Group them into themes. Name each theme in plain words.
3. Merge items that report the same event into one line, and list every outlet that reported it. If two outlets contradict each other, keep both versions in that line and write CONTRADICTION.
4. Mark SINGLE SOURCE where only one outlet reports something.
5. Dates may arrive in mixed digits: ١٢٣ alongside 123. Copy each date as it appears in the item.
6. Do not judge whether a claim is true. If an item does not say who or when, write "the item does not say".

Give me, in this order:
A. The themes, most reported first. Under each theme, one line per item: what is claimed, which outlet, what date.
B. Everything marked SINGLE SOURCE or CONTRADICTION, as one list.
C. What is missing: which of these stories has no follow-up, and which claims nobody has answered.
D. Five lines a colleague could read aloud in a meeting.

Items:
[PASTE THE ITEMS]

Answer in [ANSWER LANGUAGE], even if the material below is in another language.

Write one section of a donor report using ONLY the notes below.

Rules:
1. Never invent a number, a place, a date or a beneficiary. If a figure is missing, write [NUMBER NEEDED] and carry on.
2. Copy every figure exactly as it stands in the notes. Do not round it, and do not replace it with a phrase such as "about 200".
3. Do not describe an activity that is not in the notes.
4. Report a target that was missed as a missed target, with the reason from the notes. Do not present it as a partial success.
5. Where two notes disagree, write both and say they disagree. Do not merge them into one sentence.
6. Plain language, short sentences. No promotional adjectives. Maximum [WORD COUNT] words.

Structure:
A. What was done in this period.
B. Results against the indicator, answered as the indicator is written: [PASTE THE INDICATOR WORDING].
C. What did not go to plan, why, and what changes next period as a result.
D. A list of every [NUMBER NEEDED] you wrote, so I can fill them in.

Notes:
[PASTE YOUR MONITORING NOTES]

Answer in [ANSWER LANGUAGE], even if the material below is in another language.

I have a spreadsheet I cannot upload. I will describe it instead. The three rows below are invented by me, not copied out of the file, and I will never paste a real row. Do not ask me for the file or for real rows.

Columns and what they hold:
[LIST THE COLUMN NAMES AND WHAT EACH CONTAINS]

Three invented rows, in the same shape as the real ones:
[PASTE THREE INVENTED ROWS]

What is wrong with it:
[DESCRIBE THE PROBLEMS: mixed date formats, duplicates, mixed digits: ١٢٣ alongside 123, trailing spaces, merged cells, several answers in one cell]

What I need at the end:
[DESCRIBE THE RESULT YOU WANT]

Give me, in this order:
A. Numbered steps, in the order I should do them, each saying what to do and what the file will look like afterwards.
B. The formula, or the script, for each step that needs one. Say which program it is for.
C. The assumptions you made about my data, one per line, and for each one what it will silently break if the assumption is wrong and how I would spot that.
D. What to check after each step to know it worked, including the row count before and after.

Work only from my description. If my description is not enough to write a step safely, say what you need to know instead of guessing.

Answer in [ANSWER LANGUAGE], even if the material below is in another language.

I have a claim I cannot verify yet. Do NOT tell me whether it is true, and do not estimate how likely it is. I need a plan for checking it.

Rules:
1. Give no verdict. Do not write "probably", "likely", "appears genuine" or any other judgement of the claim.
2. Do not perform the checks. Do not search. Write the plan only.
3. Name people by type of person or institution, never by name.
4. If a check needs something I did not give you, say what it is instead of assuming it.

The claim: [WRITE THE CLAIM IN ONE SENTENCE]
What I have: [DESCRIBE WHAT YOU HAVE: a photo, a video, a document, a forwarded message, a screenshot]
What I already know: [DATE, PLACE, WHO IS SAYING IT, WHERE IT CAME FROM]

Give me, in this order:
A. What would have to be true for this claim to hold, as separate testable statements.
B. The checks, ordered from cheapest to most expensive, and for each one the result that would support the claim and the result that would refute it.
C. What evidence would disprove the claim, and who could confirm or refute it locally, by type of person or institution and never by name.
D. What cannot be checked from the material I have, including what you, as a language model, cannot check at all.

Answer in [ANSWER LANGUAGE], even if the material below is in another language.

Below is one section of our own report, with identifying details already removed. Translate it into English for a donor. Carry the meaning across at exactly the strength the source gives it, never stronger.

Rules:
1. Keep every claim at source strength. "We observed" must not become "we established". "Some participants said" must not become "participants said". Every hedge in the source stays a hedge in the English.
2. Add nothing. If the source does not say who, how many, where or when, do not supply it.
3. Copy every figure and date exactly, and keep mixed digits (١٢٣ alongside 123) in the form each one appears.
4. Where the source is unclear, translate it literally and mark it [CHECK]. Do not make it read well.
5. Section A is the English translation. Write sections B, C and D in the language named above.

Give me, in this order:
A. The translation.
B. Every sentence where your English is stronger, broader or more certain than the source: the source wording on one line, your wording on the next, then one line saying what changed. Write "none" only if there are none.
C. Every [CHECK], one line each, saying what is unclear in the source.
D. Every place where you used a term the source did not use, with the source word beside it.

The report section:
[PASTE THE SECTION, WITH NAMES AND IDENTIFYING DETAILS ALREADY REMOVED]

Answer in [ANSWER LANGUAGE], even if the material below is in another language.

I have an interview tomorrow. Build a guide from the topics below. The person I will interview may have lived through hard events, so every question must be open, must not suggest its own answer, and must not ask for a detail we do not need.

Rules:
1. Write no question that carries its own answer. The words of the answer you expect must not appear in the question.
2. Ask for no identifying detail beyond what the topic needs. No exact address, no full name of a third person, no employer, no date of birth.
3. Ask about events and sequence, not about feelings the person has not offered.
4. Every question must be answerable with a refusal. Add no question that assumes the person will continue.
5. Invent no organisation name, no project name and no place where the recording will be kept. Leave each of those as a gap marked [FILL IN BY HAND].
6. Plain words. One idea per question.

Give me, in this order:
A. An opening script to read aloud: who I am, what the interview is for, where the recording and the notes will be kept, that the person may stop at any moment or skip any question, and how to withdraw consent later. Plain language, under 150 words, no legal terms.
B. Eight to twelve questions, grouped under the topics below, each with one follow-up question under it.
C. Questions to avoid, six at most, each with its reason in three or four words: suggests the answer, reopens the harm, or asks a detail we do not need.
D. A closing script: what happens next, and one sentence checking the person is still comfortable with what they gave.

Topics:
[LIST YOUR THREE OR FOUR TOPICS]

Answer in [ANSWER LANGUAGE], even if the material below is in another language.

I have eight minutes on a board agenda. Read the report below and write what the board needs, not a summary of the report.

Rules:
1. Use only the report below. Add nothing from your own knowledge.
2. Every point names the page it rests on. A point with no page is removed, not kept.
3. Quote the report's own wording for anything a board member could dispute.
4. Copy every figure exactly as printed, including mixed digits: ١٢٣ alongside 123.
5. Do not soften and do not dramatise. Short sentences only.

Give me, in this order:
A. The three decisions this board must actually take, one line each, with the page each rests on and what happens if it is delayed.
B. The two risks the report itself names, quoted, each with its page.
C. What the report does not answer that a board will ask, as three questions.
D. One slide of numbers: at most six figures, each with a label and its page.

Report:
[PASTE THE REPORT]

Answer in [ANSWER LANGUAGE], even if the material below is in another language.

Below is the table of contents of one issue of an official gazette. I have the titles only, not the full texts. Sort them for me.

Rules:
1. Work only from the titles I give you. Do not describe content you have not been given, and do not fill it in from what such items usually contain.
2. Where the title alone does not say what an item changes, write "The title alone is not enough" in that cell and stop there.
3. Copy each item's number, date and title exactly as printed, including mixed digits: ١٢٣ alongside 123.
4. Give every item one verdict: "Read in full", "Watch" or "Ignore", with a reason of one line.
5. Add nothing about who published it, why, or what it means politically.

Give me, in this order:
A. A table with these columns: item as printed, what it appears to change, who it appears to affect, verdict, reason.
B. The items where the title alone is not enough, listed again, each with the one question that would settle it.
C. If there is time for only three, the order to open them in.

If you are reading on a phone, replace the table with one block per row: a heading line, then one short labelled line per column.

Table of contents:
[PASTE THE LIST OF ITEMS]

Answer in [ANSWER LANGUAGE], even if the material below is in another language.

Build me a weekly routine for watching one topic. I have no paid tool and no budget. I will run every search by hand on a phone.

The topic: [WRITE THE TOPIC IN A FEW WORDS, AND THE PLACE NAME IF IT HAS ONE]

Rules:
1. You cannot search. Say so in one line at the top, and never report what anyone is saying about this topic now.
2. Search phrases only. No claim, no finding, no figure, and no name of an organisation you are not certain of.
3. Public sources only. Nothing that needs a login, a payment or a private group.
4. Do not ask me about my organisation, my colleagues or our funding. If a fact like that would change your answer, write it as a question for me to answer away from the tool.
5. Everything must fit inside thirty minutes a week.

Give me, in this order:
A. Eight to twelve search phrases. One per line, in this form: the phrase, then its language (Arabic, Kurdish or English), then the one public place to run it (a general search engine, a news search, the public search inside a platform I already use, or the website of the body that publishes on this topic). Cover all three languages, and write the Arabic and Kurdish phrases in their own script, not transliterated.
B. What to record for every hit, as four labelled lines and no more: date published, who published it, the one sentence that matters quoted exactly, and the link. Copy dates exactly as written, including mixed digits: ١٢٣ alongside 123.
C. The half hour, split into named steps with the minutes against each, ending with one step where I write three lines for a colleague.
D. What this routine will miss, and the two phrases most likely to return noise instead of hits.

Do not run the searches. Write the routine.

Answer in [ANSWER LANGUAGE], even if the material below is in another language.

My receipts and my spreadsheet do not agree, and I can upload neither of them. I will describe the spreadsheet instead. Real rows are never pasted here, so do not ask me for them and do not ask me to upload a file.

Columns and what each one holds:
[LIST THE COLUMN NAMES AND WHAT EACH CONTAINS]

Three invented rows in the same shape as the real ones:
[PASTE THREE FAKE ROWS]

What does not match:
[DESCRIBE THE DIFFERENCE: the two totals differ, a receipt has no row, a row has no receipt, one payment is split across two receipts, mixed digits: ١٢٣ alongside 123, two currencies, dates written in two formats]

Rules:
1. Work only from my description and the invented rows. Never invent a figure of mine, and never assume a total.
2. If a step cannot be done without seeing my data, say so and tell me what to look at myself.
3. Order the steps so that the cheapest check comes first.

Give me, in this order:
A. Numbered steps, in the order I should do them, each one narrowing down where the difference is.
B. The formula or the script for each step that needs one, and which program it is for.
C. The assumptions you made about my spreadsheet, as a list, and for each one, what it silently breaks if it is wrong.
D. What to check after each step, including the row count and the total before and after.

Answer in [ANSWER LANGUAGE], even if the material below is in another language.

Below is a prompt I used and the answer I got. I do not trust the answer. Examine it. Do not defend it, and do not rewrite it. I am not asking for a better answer. I am asking what is wrong with this one and what in my wording allowed it.

Rules:
1. Judge the answer only against what my prompt gave it. If a claim is not supported by the material or the instructions in my prompt, say so, even when the claim sounds correct.
2. Quote the exact words of the answer you object to. Do not paraphrase them. Copy numbers as they appear, including mixed digits: ١٢٣ alongside 123.
3. Separate two things: a claim that goes beyond what was given, and a detail that appears invented, such as a number, a date, an article number, a page reference, a name or a quotation with no source in my prompt.
4. Add no facts of your own, and do not tell me whether the answer is true in the world. Tell me whether my prompt supports it.
5. If nothing in the answer is unsupported, say that plainly in one line.

Give me, in this order:
A. Unsupported claims. For each: the quoted words, and one sentence saying what would have had to be in my prompt for the claim to stand.
B. Details that appear invented. For each: the quoted detail, its type (number, date, article number, page, name, quotation), and where in my prompt it would have come from if it were real.
C. What in my wording allowed it. Point at the exact phrase, or at the instruction that is missing, not at the tool.
D. The two changes to my prompt. Write out each replacement line in full, ready for me to copy, and nothing else in this section.

The prompt I used:
[PASTE THE PROMPT YOU USED]

The answer I got:
[PASTE THE ANSWER YOU GOT]