Gaiish Examples

Review this sales report and tell me what to do next.

INTENT:
Choose the one sales action the commercial lead should take this week.

CONTEXT:
[paste the report]
The lead has 20 minutes. The report covers the last quarter and uses closed-won revenue.

INSTRUCTION:
Extract the strongest trend, compare it with the stated target, and recommend one action.

CONSTRAINTS:
Do not invent causes. Quote the report for every number. Separate evidence from interpretation.

OUTPUT:
A five-sentence recommendation followed by an Evidence table with metric, value and source.

VALIDATION:
Check every number against the report and list any question the report cannot answer.

Rewrite this announcement to sound more professional.

INTENT:
Help existing customers understand the product change and what they need to do.

CONTEXT:
[paste announcement]
Audience: non-technical customers who already use the product. The change takes effect on 1 October.

INSTRUCTION:
Rewrite the announcement in plain language and preserve every factual detail.

CONSTRAINTS:
Calm, direct tone. No jargon, hype or exclamation marks. No more than 180 words.

RESULT:
Subject line plus email body, with the customer action in a separate final paragraph.

VALIDATION:
Compare dates, product names and customer actions with the source and list any ambiguous sentence.

Summarise this incident for leadership.

INTENT:
Give the technology director enough evidence to decide whether the incident requires a customer communication.

CONTEXT:
[paste incident timeline and logs]
The director is not an incident responder. Times are UTC; the service affected is the billing API.

INSTRUCTION:
Separate confirmed events, likely contributing factors and unresolved questions.

CONSTRAINTS:
Do not infer root cause from a log absence. Preserve timestamps. Avoid security-sensitive values and secrets.

OUTPUT:
A 150-word executive summary, then a timeline table and a Risks / Decisions needed section.

VALIDATION:
Check each event against the timeline, flag missing intervals and mark every inference as inference.

Explain this chapter to my students.

GOAL:
Help students distinguish the chapter's central claim from its supporting examples.

CONTEXT:
[paste source passage]
Students are 14 and have 25 minutes. They know the vocabulary in the lesson glossary.

ACTION:
Create a short worked example and a paired classification activity.

OUTPUT:
Teacher instructions, student handout and answer key.

CONSTRAINTS:
Use only the passage and glossary. Keep reading level accessible.

VALIDATION:
Quote the passage for every answer-key decision and mark ambiguous items.

Compare these vendors and recommend one.

INTENT:
Select the vendor that best fits a small team needing a reliable support platform this year.

CONTEXT:
[paste the three proposals]
Team size: 6. Current system has no export automation. Decision owner: operations manager.

INSTRUCTION:
Extract comparable facts, score each proposal against the criteria, and state the trade-off behind the recommendation.

CONSTRAINTS:
Use only supplied proposal facts. Do not treat marketing adjectives as evidence. Weight reliability and export capability above optional features.

OUTPUT:
A criteria table, a weighted score with calculation notes, recommendation and two questions for the preferred vendor.

VALIDATION:
Check each score against the criteria and mark missing prices, terms or capabilities as unknown.

Reply to this angry customer.

INTENT:
Resolve the customer's documented issue and make the next step clear without promising an unapproved remedy.

CONTEXT:
[paste the customer message and case history]
The agent may offer a refund only when the policy below allows it. Audience: the customer, who is frustrated.

INSTRUCTION:
Draft a reply that acknowledges the issue, states what is known, and gives the next action.

CONSTRAINTS:
Warm but direct. Do not blame the customer or claim an investigation is complete. Do not promise a refund unless the policy supports it. Under 160 words.

OUTPUT:
Email body with no subject line, followed by an internal note listing any approval needed.

VALIDATION:
Check every promise against the case history and policy, and flag missing facts before the reply is sent.