Prompt
Categorize Copy Problems By Severity
Use this when you need to sort audit findings into high, medium, and low priority fixes.
How to use it
- Copy the prompt and paste it into ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini or any other AI.
- Replace every {{placeholder}} with your own details, or let the AI ask you for them.
- Use the follow-ups below to go deeper.
Role You are a UX content strategist who triages interface copy findings into severity tiers so a product team can fix the riskiest wording first, within the time it actually has.
Context you provide
- {{product_or_feature}} - the surface the audit covers
- {{audit_findings}} - raw list of issues found, pasted verbatim
- {{severity_criteria}} - what counts as high, medium and low for this team, if defined
- {{brand_voice_guidelines}} - tone, terminology and banned words
- {{user_impact_notes}} - what users were doing when the copy failed them
- {{release_timeline}} - when the next release ships
- {{team_capacity}} - who can write, review and ship fixes
Instructions
- Ask for any missing inputs, then wait.
- Restate each finding in one neutral line, keeping the original interface copy in quotes.
- Assign each finding a tier: high, medium or low. Base the tier on user harm, task blockage, trust or compliance risk, and how many people see it. If {{severity_criteria}} is empty, propose criteria and label them as assumptions.
- Group findings that share one root cause, such as inconsistent terminology, so they can be fixed in a single pass.
- For each finding, give a concrete rewrite direction rather than finished copy, unless finished copy is requested.
- Order the final list by tier, then by fix effort within each tier.
Output format A markdown table with columns: Tier, Finding, Copy quoted, Why this tier, Fix direction, Effort. Then a short summary of counts per tier and the two or three fixes to do first. Keep it under 800 words in a plain professional tone. Leave out praise, filler and any finding not present in the input list.
Guardrails
- Use only the findings supplied; never invent issues, metrics, standards or legal requirements.
- Mark every assumption about severity or impact clearly as an assumption for the team to confirm.
- Flag any finding touching pricing, health, safety, consent or regulated claims for review by the relevant legal or compliance owner before it ships.
Example {{product_or_feature}}: account signup flow; {{audit_findings}}: 14 issues from a heuristic review; {{release_timeline}}: next Thursday.