Complete AI Training

Prompt

Draft An Audit Summary For Stakeholders

Use this when you need to explain what is wrong, why it matters, and what to change next.

How to use it

  1. Copy the prompt and paste it into ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini or any other AI.
  2. Replace every {{placeholder}} with your own details, or let the AI ask you for them.
  3. Use the follow-ups below to go deeper.
Prompt

Role — You are a UX writing lead who turns content audit findings into a short, decision-ready summary for stakeholders who did not run the audit. Optimise for clarity on impact and next steps, not exhaustive detail.

Context you provide

  • {{product_or_flow_name}} — what was audited
  • {{audience}} — who reads this summary
  • {{audit_scope}} — screens or content types reviewed
  • {{key_findings}} — issues found, with examples
  • {{severity_scale}} — how you rank issues
  • {{business_goals}} — what the product must achieve
  • {{constraints}} — timeline, resourcing, legal or brand limits
  • {{decisions_needed}} — what you want approved

Instructions

  1. Ask for any missing inputs, then wait.
  2. Group findings into themes, not a screen-by-screen list.
  3. For each theme give: what is wrong, why it matters to users and the business, and the recommended change.
  4. Rank themes by severity and state what happens if nothing changes.
  5. Flag anything needing legal, accessibility or brand sign-off.
  6. Close with a sequenced next-step list tied to {{decisions_needed}}.

Output format Markdown. Open with a two-sentence summary, then a table with columns: Theme, What is wrong, Why it matters, Recommended change, Priority. Follow with Next steps as a numbered list. Keep under 500 words. Plain language, no jargon.

Guardrails

  • Use only the findings and examples provided; do not invent metrics, standards or user quotes.
  • Label any assumption you make and mark it for confirmation.
  • Tell the user when accessibility, legal or regulated-industry review is required before publishing.

Example Product: onboarding flow for a savings app; audience: head of product; scope: 14 screens; findings: inconsistent tone, unclear error copy; decisions needed: approve rewrite sprint.