Meeting notes often mix decisions, ideas and unanswered questions. AI can help sort them out, as long as it does not turn a suggestion into a promise.
You will create an action plan linked to the source notes from fictional event notes. Use any text chatbot and allow about 15 minutes. Replace real people's details with appropriate anonymous labels when testing.
A tidy table is helpful. It still cannot turn "we could" into "we agreed".
Read this example as text
Confirmed action
- Maya: ask the caretaker
- Due: Tuesday (date not supplied)
- Evidence: note N2
Still undecided
- Ticket price: free or £2?
- Refreshments: suggestion only
- Date: not agreed
See the finished example
Read the complete finished example
Initial plan: notes N1–N6
| Task | Owner | Deadline / dependency | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ask caretaker about hall availability | Maya | Tuesday; calendar date not supplied | N2 |
| Draft poster | Leo | After date confirmation | N4 |
| Hold poster printing | Unassigned | Until date and ticket decision confirmed | N6 |
Open decisions
- Date: not agreed (N1).
- Ticket price: free and £2 both suggested; no decision (N5).
Suggestions, not commitments
Refreshments are suggested, with no organizer assigned (N3).
Updated plan: after N7–N8
Admission is now free (N7). Leo will print the approved poster after the date is confirmed (N8). The date is still undecided and the hall is not yet booked.
| Owner | Checklist | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Maya | Ask caretaker by Tuesday; calendar date not supplied | N2 |
| Leo | Draft after date confirmation; print the approved poster only after the date is confirmed | N4, N6–N8 |
1. Label the source notes
Copy this sample:
N1. Saturday fair: use the school hall. Date still undecided.
N2. Maya agreed to ask the caretaker about hall availability by Tuesday.
N3. We could sell refreshments, but nobody agreed to organize them.
N4. Leo will draft the poster after we confirm the date.
N5. Someone said tickets should be free. Later someone suggested £2.
N6. Agreed: do not print the poster until the date and ticket decision are confirmed.Numbered notes make it easier to trace a task back to its source. Do not silently fix contradictions before extraction; they belong in the review.
2. Separate commitments from ideas
Use only notes N1–N6 below.
[PASTE THE NOTES]
Create three sections:
1. Confirmed actions: task, owner, deadline/dependency and source note.
2. Open decisions or conflicts, with source notes.
3. Suggestions that have not been agreed.
Use "unassigned" for an unknown owner and "not agreed" for an
unknown deadline. Do not turn suggestions into commitments.
Keep relative dates such as "Tuesday" unless I provide a meeting date.3. Inspect the table instead of trusting its appearance
An example extraction of the confirmed actions would include:
| Task | Owner | Deadline or dependency | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ask caretaker about hall availability | Maya | Tuesday; calendar date not supplied | N2 |
| Draft poster | Leo | After date confirmation | N4 |
| Hold printing | Unassigned | Until date and ticket decision confirmed | N6 |
The date and ticket price remain open. Refreshments remain a suggestion. “Maya will organize refreshments by Tuesday” would be an invented commitment even though every word sounds plausible in context.
4. Resolve ambiguities with people, then update
Suppose the organizer confirms that admission is free and assigns printing to Leo. Add new labelled notes rather than erasing the earlier conflict:
N7. Organizer confirmation: admission is free.
N8. Leo will print the approved poster after the date is confirmed.Ask the assistant to update the table using the additional evidence, preserving the date dependency. It must not treat the hall as booked just because someone is checking availability.
5. Export a plan someone can use
Ask for a compact checklist grouped by owner. Keep the evidence table as a review record. If you transfer tasks into a project-management app, confirm the actual dates and assignees there; this tutorial only prepares text and does not create assignments automatically.
Check your result
- Every confirmed action has supporting notes.
- Owners and dates are supplied or clearly unknown.
- Suggestions are not presented as decisions.
- Conflicting statements remain visible until resolved.
- Dependencies survive the rewrite.
Troubleshooting
“Tuesday” became a guessed date. Supply the meeting date and time zone or keep the original relative wording. Review any conversion.
One person appears to own every task. Ask for evidence of each assignment. Being the speaker does not always mean being the owner.
The table ignores uncertainty. Add a required uncertainty column. “Not agreed” is a useful output, not an extraction failure.
This workflow follows the principle of defining and checking success criteria before refining prompts. See Anthropic's overview. The example is original and illustrative; AI extraction still requires source review.