Give the work a clear finish line.

Make the work easier to move forward.

A good brief answers a careful teammate’s questions: what decision will this support, which information counts, and what should the finished work look like? Explain what happens if something is missing. A few plain sentences can remove consequential ambiguity without prescribing every sentence of the output.

Requests such as 'look into this' or 'handle the follow-up' conceal several possible jobs. Researching, drafting, changing a record, and sending a message have different consequences. A brief should identify which job is intended and where the next human decision belongs.

What to bring to the task

• The person who will use the result and their immediate decision
• The authoritative documents, threads, or notes for this task
• One suitable example, with any outdated facts identified
• The deadline, reviewer, and permitted next action

From context to a useful result.

1. Start with the result someone needs

   Describe the deliverable and why it matters: 'Prepare a meeting brief so I can decide which launch blockers need attention.' This gives a basis for choosing relevant details. Specify whether the reader needs an explanation, a recommendation, a draft, or a list of unresolved questions.

2. Draw a source boundary

   Name the material to use and the period it covers. Explain which source wins if two disagree. For example, treat a dated decision record as authoritative and a later informal comment as a question to verify. If no precedence is justified, ask for the disagreement to remain visible.

3. Define the shape of a usable answer

   Set a practical length and a few sections. Specify details that let the reader act: an owner, evidence, confirmed due date, and next decision. Avoid demanding a fixed number of findings when the evidence might support fewer. Empty slots should not invite invented content.

4. State how to handle gaps

   Separate questions that block the whole task from gaps that can be flagged in a useful partial result. An unknown recipient blocks sending; an unconfirmed milestone date can appear as an open question in a draft. Ask for assumptions to be labeled and for consequential claims to have traceable support.

5. Specify the stop and the review

   End with an explicit handoff: prepare privately, return for review, or perform a specifically authorized action. Name who checks facts and who approves delivery. Add a freshness requirement when timing matters, such as checking whether a reply arrived before a follow-up is considered for sending.

Before you make it a routine

• The deliverable has a named reader and purpose
• Sources and conflicting-information rules are explicit
• Missing information has a defined treatment
• Preparation and any later action are separately described