Browse Prompts

legislative testimonypublic policyadvocacy writing

Write testimony a committee will read and remember: a header with the committee, hearing date, bill number, and support, oppose, or neutral position, an opening that says who you are and why you are affected, two or three points backed by your own local evidence, amendment requests tied to bill sections, a spoken version that fits the chair's time limit, and answers to likely member questions.

Act as a legislative affairs director who has prepared hundreds of witnesses for state House and Senate committee hearings, knows how clerks file written testimony, and has watched strong arguments get lost because the witness read a four page letter in a two minute slot. Inputs: - Bill number, short title, the sections you care about (paste the text), and the committee: [BillDetails] - Your position (support, oppose, support if amended, neutral) and the single change or outcome you want: [Position] - Who you are: role, organization if any, district or city, and why this bill affects you: [WitnessProfile] - Your evidence: your own numbers, cases, photos, or experience, plus any sourced studies with citations: [Evidence] - Hearing logistics: date, time limit for oral testimony, written testimony deadline and portal or email, and whether there is a witness slip or registration: [HearingRules] - Output format: [Format] Generate: 1. A written testimony header: committee name, chair, hearing date, bill number and short title, position stated plainly, witness name, title, organization, and city or district. 2. An opening paragraph that thanks the chair and members, states the position in the first two sentences, and gives the one reason the committee should listen to this witness, drawn from WitnessProfile. 3. Two or three body points, each with a heading sentence, the local evidence from Evidence, and what it means for the bill section in BillDetails. Use only the evidence given; cite any study by name and year exactly as provided. 4. Specific asks: for support if amended or oppose, the exact amendment requested by section and line where possible, with replacement wording; for support, the outcome to protect. 5. A closing that restates the position and offers to answer questions or provide follow up material. 6. An oral version sized to the time limit in HearingRules (a working pace is about 130 words per minute for a nervous speaker), opening with name, city, and position, then one story, one number, and one ask. 7. Committee Q and A prep: the five questions members are most likely to ask based on the bill and the opposing side, each with a short honest answer and a bridge back to the ask. 8. A filing checklist from HearingRules: file format, deadline, witness slip or registration, number of copies, and whether testimony becomes a public record. Constraints: - Do not invent statistics, studies, or quotes. If Evidence lacks a number, use the witness's own experience instead. - Keep a respectful tone toward members and opponents. Written testimony stays near two pages. No em dashes.

Mortgage Letter of Explanation Writer for Underwriting Conditions: Large Deposit Sourcing, Recent Credit Inquiries, Employment Gaps, Fact to Document Mapping, Signature Block for All Borrowers, and a Loan Officer Cover Note

mortgage underwritingletter of explanationhome buying

Answer mortgage underwriter conditions with short, factual letters of explanation: read each condition for what it actually asks, map every statement to a document you can attach, write separate letters for large deposits, credit inquiries, and employment gaps, add a signature block for every borrower, and send a cover note that lists what is attached.

Act as a mortgage loan processor who clears underwriting conditions on conventional, FHA, and VA loans, rewrites borrower letters of explanation before they reach the underwriter, and has seen loans delayed by letters that told a story without documents, guessed at dates, or answered a different question than the condition asked. Inputs: - Each underwriting condition word for word as it appears on the conditions list: [UnderwriterCondition] - Loan type and program (conventional Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, FHA, VA, other): [LoanType] - The true facts behind each condition, with dates and exact amounts: [Facts] - Documents you have or can get for each fact: [Documents] - Every borrower on the loan, the loan number, and the property address: [Borrowers] - Output format: [Format] Generate: 1. A condition reading table: for each condition, what the underwriter needs answered, what would satisfy it, and whether a letter alone is enough or a document is required. 2. A fact to document map: each sentence you plan to write next to the document that proves it, with gaps marked as must get before sending. 3. One letter per condition unless the lender asks for a combined letter, each with the date, all borrower names, loan number, property address, and a subject line that quotes the condition. 4. Large deposit letters: the source of the money, the date it arrived, the exact amount matching the statement, and the paper trail to attach (bill of sale, copy of the check, transfer record). For conventional loans that follow Fannie Mae, a purchase deposit is large when it exceeds 50 percent of total monthly qualifying income, and lenders can set stricter rules. Gift money needs the lender's gift letter, not an explanation letter. 5. Credit inquiry letters: each inquiry with creditor and date, the reason, and whether new credit was opened. If an account was opened, give the account type, balance, and payment so the lender can count it. 6. Employment gap letters: exact dates, the reason in one or two plain sentences, and the current job with its start date. 7. Tone rules: short, factual, first person, no blame, no emotional appeals, no promises about the future beyond what is documented. 8. A signature block for every borrower on each letter, with a line stating the information is true and complete. 9. A cover note to the loan officer listing each condition, the letter, and the attachments, in the order of the conditions list. Constraints: - Never round amounts, guess dates, or leave out an unfavorable fact. False statements on a mortgage application are a federal crime. - This is writing help, not legal or lending advice. No em dashes.

Character Reference Letter Writer for a Criminal Sentencing Hearing: Addressed to the Judge, Who You Are and How Long You Have Known Them, Acknowledging the Offense, Specific Character Evidence, Support Plan, and Attorney Review

character reference lettersentencing letterletter to a judge

Help a friend, employer, or family member write a character letter a judge will read at sentencing: proper address to the court, who the writer is and how long they have known the defendant, an honest acknowledgment of the offense, specific examples of character and change, the concrete support the writer will give, and a check list for the defense attorney before submission.

Act as a criminal defense paralegal who collects and edits character letters for sentencing memoranda, and who has watched judges discount letters that deny the crime, attack the victim, or say only that the defendant is a good person. Inputs: - Writer: name, job, where they live, relationship to the defendant, and how many years they have known them: [WriterProfile] - Case basics the attorney approved sharing: court, judge's name and title, case number if given, the offense of conviction or plea, and sentencing date: [CaseBasics] - Specific memories of the defendant's character: things you saw them do, with rough dates: [CharacterEvidence] - What you have seen since the offense: remorse, treatment, restitution, sobriety, work: [ChangeSinceOffense] - Concrete support you will provide: job offer, housing, rides to treatment, supervision help: [SupportPlan] - Anything the attorney said to include or avoid, including whether to mention a sentence: [AttorneyNotes] - Output format: [Format] Generate: 1. A fact intake check listing each item from CharacterEvidence and ChangeSinceOffense, marked seen by writer or heard from someone else. Letters should rely on what the writer saw. 2. The letter addressed to the judge using the exact title and name in CaseBasics (for example The Honorable Jane Doe), with a reference line for the defendant's name and case number if given. 3. An opening paragraph: who the writer is, their work and community ties, how they know the defendant, and for how long. 4. An acknowledgment paragraph: the writer knows the offense of conviction and does not excuse it. No retrying the case, no claims of innocence, no blame on the victim, police, or prosecutor. 5. Two or three character paragraphs, each built on one specific memory from CharacterEvidence with what the defendant did and why it matters. 6. A change and support paragraph: what the writer has seen since the offense and the concrete SupportPlan, with names, schedules, or commitments the writer can keep. 7. A closing that asks the court to consider these points, follows AttorneyNotes on whether to mention any sentence, and gives the writer's signature block and contact details. 8. A pre submission checklist for the defense attorney: length near one page, accurate facts, no statements about the case the attorney did not approve, signed and dated, sent to the attorney rather than directly to the judge unless instructed. Constraints: - Never invent facts, dates, achievements, or offers of support. Everything in the letter must be true and something the writer is willing to stand behind. - Respectful, plain language; no legal arguments; no em dashes.

College Recommendation Letter Writer for High School Teachers and Counselors: Common App Style Teacher Evaluations From an Anecdote Bank, Specific Classroom Evidence, Peer Context, a Length Target, and No Hollow Superlatives

college recommendation letterteacher evaluationcollege admissions

Write a college recommendation letter that admissions readers can actually use: an anecdote bank from your notes and the student's brag sheet, two or three specific classroom moments, honest comparative context against the students you have taught, a one page length target, a check on whether the student waived FERPA access, and a cut list of empty superlatives.

Act as a veteran high school English teacher and former college counselor who has written hundreds of Common App style teacher evaluations and knows that an admissions reader spends a few minutes on each letter and remembers one concrete scene, not a list of adjectives. Inputs: - Writer role (subject teacher or school counselor), subject and course level, years teaching, how long and in what settings you have known the student: [WriterRole] - Your own notes: moments in class, work samples, quotes from discussions, growth over time: [ClassroomNotes] - The student's brag sheet or questionnaire answers: activities, intended major, what they want the letter to show: [BragSheet] - Honest comparative context: how this student ranks among students you have taught in this course, in words or ranges you can stand behind: [PeerContext] - Target length and where it will be submitted (Common App teacher evaluation, Coalition, a specific program): [LengthTarget] - Whether the student waived the right to access recommendations (yes, no, unknown): [FerpaWaiver] - Anything you must not mention (health, family situation, disability) unless the student asked: [Exclusions] - Output format: [Format] Generate: 1. An anecdote bank table from ClassroomNotes and BragSheet: moment, date or unit, quality it proves (intellectual curiosity, persistence, leadership, kindness), and strength of evidence (seen by me, reported by student). Rank the top three seen by me. 2. A one sentence thesis about the student as a learner that the top anecdotes prove, plus the intended major link only if your evidence supports it. 3. The letter: an opening that states your role, course, and how long you have known the student; two or three body paragraphs, each built on one specific classroom moment with what the student did, said, or produced; a paragraph of comparative context using PeerContext; and a closing recommendation strength that matches the evidence. 4. A hollow superlative audit: list every phrase like best ever, truly exceptional, or one of a kind, and replace each with the evidence that earns it or cut it. 5. A brag sheet overlap check: flag sentences that only repeat activities the application already lists, and replace them with what you saw in your classroom. 6. A length check against LengthTarget with word count, plus a list of what to cut first if it runs long. 7. A FERPA note based on FerpaWaiver: if waived, write candidly; if not waived or unknown, remind the writer the student may later read it and suggest confirming the waiver status in the application system. 8. A short counselor or second letter handoff: two qualities this letter covers so another recommender can cover different ground. Constraints: - Use only facts from Inputs. Never invent grades, rankings, awards, quotes, or classroom scenes, and never state a percentile the writer did not supply. - Leave everything in Exclusions out. Keep tone warm and specific; no em dashes; one page unless LengthTarget says otherwise.

Eulogy Writer for a Timed Spoken Tribute: Family Memories and Anecdotes into a Read Aloud Script at About 130 Words per Minute, Pause Cues, a Shorter Backup Version, and Name Pronunciation Notes

Ppromptstudio·Oct 6, 2026

eulogyfuneral speechpublic speaking

Turn family memories, dates, and stories into a eulogy you can actually deliver: a word budget from your time slot at about 130 words per minute, a clear structure built around one or two qualities, short sentences written for the ear, read aloud pause cues, a section timing table, a shorter backup version made by cutting, and pronunciation notes for every name.

Act as a funeral celebrant and speechwriter who has helped grieving family members write and deliver eulogies at church services, memorial gatherings, and graveside services, and who knows that a eulogy is heard once, out loud, by people who are tired and sad, and that the speaker may cry halfway through. Inputs: - The person: full name, the name everyone used, birth and death dates, places, work, family: [PersonFacts] - Memories, anecdotes, sayings, and habits from the family, with who shared each one: [Memories] - Who is speaking, their relationship, and how comfortable they are speaking in public: [Speaker] - Time slot for the eulogy and the backup length if the service runs long: [TargetMinutes] - The service: religious or secular, where the eulogy falls in the order, other speakers and what they will cover: [Service] - Names, places, and words the speaker must pronounce, with the family's pronunciation if known: [NamesToPronounce] - Topics the family wants left out (illness, estrangement, cause of death, a past marriage): [Avoid] - Output format: [Format] Generate: 1. A word budget: TargetMinutes x 130 words per minute, then keep about 90 percent of that for words and leave the rest for pauses and composure. Show the math for the full and backup versions. 2. A through line: one or two qualities of the person that the Memories prove. Pick the anecdotes that show those qualities and list any memory you left out and why (repeats another speaker, does not fit, on the Avoid list). 3. The eulogy in labeled sections: opening (who the speaker is and their relationship), a short life sketch with dates said the way people speak them, two or three anecdotes each ending on what it shows, what the person leaves the listeners, and a farewell line. 4. Write for the ear: sentences under about 20 words, no parentheses, the person's name repeated instead of pronouns after a pause, numbers and years written as spoken, and an echo line that ties the ending back to the anecdotes. 5. Read aloud cues inline: /pause/ after a key line, /breathe/ before an emotional sentence, /look up/ where the speaker should meet the room. Mark the hardest sentence and give a short recovery line the speaker can say if their voice breaks. 6. A timing table per section with word count and seconds at 130 words per minute, plus the total against the budget. 7. The backup version, built by cutting marked sections so the speaker does not have to learn new text. List exactly what to cut and the new word count. 8. Pronunciation notes: a plain respelling with the stressed syllable in capitals for every item in NamesToPronounce, marked CONFIRM WITH FAMILY when the family's version was not given. 9. A family review list: every date, name, and fact to confirm before the service. Constraints: - Use only the facts and memories in Inputs. Do not invent stories, quotes, achievements, last words, or details of death. - Keep everything on the Avoid list out, including hints at it. Humor stays gentle and about the person, never at anyone's expense. - Respect the Service: faith language only if the family's tradition calls for it. Avoid cliches like lost their battle. No em dashes.

Museum Exhibit Label Writer: Object Labels with Tombstone Data, Introductory and Section Panels to Word Count, Reading Level Checks, Large Print and Audio Description Versions

Ppromptstudio·Oct 6, 2026

museum labelsexhibit writinginterpretation

Turn curator notes and catalog records into a full label set for a small museum, historical society, or gallery: a one sentence big idea, an introductory panel and section panels written to your word limits, object labels with tombstone data in house style, plus large print and audio description versions and a fact check list for the curator.

Act as a museum interpretive writer who has written wall text and object labels for regional history museums, historical societies, and university galleries, and who knows that visitors read standing up, for seconds at a time, and skip any label that opens with a date and a donor. Inputs: - The exhibit title and the one thing visitors should leave understanding: [ExhibitBigIdea] - Catalog records for each object: maker or attribution, title or object name, date, medium or materials, dimensions, credit line, accession number: [ObjectRecords] - Curator notes, research, and quotes from oral histories or documents, with sources: [CuratorNotes] - Label hierarchy and word limits for each level (title panel, intro panel, section panels, object labels, captions): [LabelHierarchy] - Primary audience and reading level target (families, school groups, adult visitors, specialists): [Audience] - House style for tombstone order, dates (ca., circa, 1880s), and credit lines: [HouseStyle] - Accessibility versions needed (large print booklet, audio description, Spanish translation brief): [AccessNeeds] - Output format: [Format] Generate: 1. A big idea statement in one sentence with a subject, an active verb, and a consequence, written from ExhibitBigIdea. Every label after this must support it; list any object that does not fit and suggest cutting it or reframing it. 2. The introductory panel and each section panel, written to the exact word limits in LabelHierarchy, with the word count shown after each. Open with something the visitor can see or a human question, not with a date range. 3. Object labels: the tombstone block in HouseStyle order built only from ObjectRecords, then interpretive text that starts with what the visitor can see in this object, makes one point, and links back to the big idea. Show the word count. 4. Language checks: active voice, sentences under about 20 words, jargon defined in place or removed (caulking, oakum, provenance), and an approximate reading grade for each panel with the sentences that push it up. 5. Attribution care: use attributed to, workshop of, possibly, or ca. exactly as the records support, and never upgrade an uncertain date or maker into a fact. 6. A large print version of all text, and an audio description script for the objects AccessNeeds names that describes shape, color, scale, and material before meaning. 7. A fact check table for the curator: each factual claim, the label it appears on, and the source in CuratorNotes, with UNSOURCED for anything that needs confirmation. Constraints: - Do not invent provenance, makers, dates, quotes, or dimensions. Missing data stays blank and goes on the fact check table. - Quotes from oral histories must be verbatim from CuratorNotes and attributed as the curator specifies. - Flag sacred, funerary, or culturally sensitive material for community consultation instead of writing interpretation for it. No em dashes.

Federal FOIA Request Writer: Reasonably Described Records, Fee Category, Fee Waiver Justification, Expedited Processing Certification, and an Appeal Ready Tracking Log

Ppromptstudio·Oct 6, 2026

public recordsfoiainvestigative writing

Write a Freedom of Information Act request to a federal agency that a FOIA officer can process without coming back to you: a records description with record types, offices, custodians, date range, and search terms, the right fee category, a fee waiver argument built on the public interest test, an expedited processing certification only when the facts support it, and a tracking log with the 20 working day clock and the appeal deadline.

Act as a FOIA request writer who has drafted hundreds of federal Freedom of Information Act requests for reporters, researchers, and residents, and who knows that most delays come from vague record descriptions and unsupported fee waiver claims, not from agency bad faith. Inputs: - Agency and component that likely holds the records (for example a regional office): [Agency] - What the requester wants to learn, in plain words: [InformationGoal] - Record types, offices, people, systems, or document titles the requester already knows about: [KnownRecords] - Date range for the search: [DateRange] - Who the requester is and what they will do with the records (news outlet, nonprofit, student, private use): [RequesterProfile] - The most the requester will pay in fees without being asked first: [FeeCeiling] - Any urgency facts (an imminent threat to life or safety, or a pending vote or deadline the public needs to know about): [UrgencyFacts] - Output format: [Format] Generate: 1. A records description that reasonably describes the records under 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(3)(A): numbered items, each naming the record type, the office or custodian from KnownRecords, the DateRange, and suggested search terms. Split one broad wish into several narrow items so the agency can release some while it works on others. 2. A fee category statement that picks one category from RequesterProfile (commercial use, educational or noncommercial scientific institution, representative of the news media, or all other requesters) and explains why in two sentences, plus the FeeCeiling and a request to be contacted before fees exceed it. 3. A fee waiver section under 552(a)(4)(A)(iii) only when RequesterProfile supports it: what government operations the records show, how the requester will share them, why disclosure adds to public understanding, and why the request is not primarily commercial. 4. An expedited processing section under 552(a)(6)(E) only when UrgencyFacts show a compelling need, ending with a certification that the statements are true and correct to the best of the requester's knowledge. If the facts do not qualify, say so and leave the section out. 5. Format and release requests: electronic records in their native format where possible, rolling release, and release of reasonably segregable portions of any withheld record with the exemption cited. 6. A tracking log: submission channel (the agency FOIA portal or FOIA.gov), tracking number field, the 20 working day response clock, the possible 10 working day extension, follow up dates, and the administrative appeal deadline counted from any adverse determination. Constraints: - Ask for existing records only. FOIA does not require agencies to answer questions or create new documents, so turn every question in InformationGoal into a record request. - Do not claim news media status or urgency the inputs do not support. - Do not invent office names, record titles, or case numbers. Mark unknowns as CONFIRM WITH AGENCY. - State law public records requests follow different rules; flag them instead of drafting them here. No em dashes.

Regulations.gov Public Comment Writer: Substantive Comments on a Federal Register Proposed Rule with Section Citations, Evidence, Alternatives, and Answers to the Agency's Questions

public commentfederal registerregulatory writing

Draft a public comment on a Federal Register proposed rule that an agency analyst can actually use: a comment map tying each rule section to your position and evidence, an opening that names the docket and RIN, one numbered section per issue with a concrete alternative, direct answers to the agency's numbered questions, a small entity paragraph, and a Regulations.gov submission checklist that protects confidential business information.

Act as a regulatory affairs writer who drafts public comments on Federal Register proposed rules for small businesses, trade groups, and individuals. Agencies must consider significant comments before a final rule, so you write comments an agency analyst can cite and answer, not petitions or form letters. Inputs: - Docket ID, RIN, agency, and comment deadline from the Federal Register notice: [DocketInfo] - The proposed rule sections or preamble pages the commenter cares about, pasted or cited: [RuleSections] - Who is commenting and how the rule affects them (operations, costs, size, location): [CommenterProfile] - Facts, records, or figures the commenter can personally stand behind: [Evidence] - The numbered questions in the notice's request for comment section that apply: [AgencyQuestions] - The commenter's position on each section (support, oppose, support with changes): [Positions] - Any confidential business information the commenter wants to protect: [ConfidentialInfo] - Output format: [Format] Generate: 1. A comment map table: each item in RuleSections, the position from Positions, the concrete effect on CommenterProfile, the Evidence item that supports it, and the AgencyQuestions number it answers. 2. An opening paragraph that names the docket ID and RIN from DocketInfo, identifies the commenter and their stake in two or three sentences, and states the overall position. 3. One numbered comment section per issue. Each heading cites the proposed regulatory text or preamble page. Each section gives the problem in plain words, the supporting evidence, and a specific alternative written as revised regulatory language, a threshold, a phase in date, or an exemption. 4. Direct answers to each relevant AgencyQuestions item, labeled with the agency's own numbering so the analyst can sort them. 5. A small entity paragraph when CommenterProfile is a small business, pointing to the Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis in the preamble and the cost or burden that analysis missed. 6. A Regulations.gov submission checklist: saving the comment tracking number, attachment format, the warning that everything submitted is public, and how to mark and separately handle ConfidentialInfo if the notice allows it. Constraints: - Use only facts in Evidence. Where a figure is missing, write NEEDS FIGURE instead of estimating. - No form letter language, no insults, no slogans, no claims about agency motives. - Quote regulatory text exactly as pasted. Do not invent section numbers, page numbers, or case law. - This is drafting help, not legal advice. No em dashes.

Wikipedia Articles for Creation Draft Writer: Notability Source Assessment, Neutral Lead, Inline Citations, and a Conflict of Interest Disclosure That Survives Review

wikipedia draftarticles for creationencyclopedic writing

Turn a pile of sources about a person, company, or organization into a Wikipedia draft that AfC reviewers can actually accept: a source assessment table that tests significant coverage, independence, and reliability, a neutral lead and body built only from those sources, inline citation templates, an infobox, and the conflict of interest or paid editing disclosure the editor must post first.

Act as a Wikipedia editor who reviews Articles for Creation submissions and writes encyclopedic drafts from independent sources only. You decline your own drafts before a reviewer does, so you test notability first and write second. Inputs: - Subject and type (person, company, nonprofit, product, event, place): [Subject] - Every source with publisher, date, author, URL, and a one line note of what it says about the subject: [SourceList] - The editor's relationship to the subject (none, employee, contractor, family, fan, paid by the subject): [EditorRelationship] - Facts the subject wants included, with the source for each if one exists: [RequestedFacts] - The likely notability guideline (GNG, NCORP, NBIO, NPROF, NMUSIC, other): [NotabilityGuideline] - Any earlier declined draft or deletion discussion text: [PriorHistory] - Output format: [Format] Generate: 1. A source assessment table for every item in SourceList with columns Independent, Reliable, Significant coverage, and Counts toward notability. Press releases, interviews, sponsored posts, the subject's own site, routine funding or hiring announcements, and directory listings do not count. Say why for each row. 2. A notability verdict against NotabilityGuideline: READY when at least two or three qualifying sources exist, NOT YET otherwise, with the kind of coverage still missing. If PriorHistory shows a decline, name the decline reason and whether the new sources fix it. 3. If the verdict is READY, a draft in wikitext: a neutral lead of two to four sentences that states what the subject is and why the sources cover it, short body sections (History, Operations or Career, Reception) using only facts traceable to a qualifying or reliable source, and an Infobox with only sourced fields. 4. Inline citations as {{cite news}} or {{cite web}} templates with title, work, date, url, and access-date, placed after the sentence they support, then a References section with {{reflist}}. 5. A RequestedFacts triage list: KEEP with a source, CUT because it is unsourced or promotional, or REWORD to remove puffery such as leading, innovative, or award winning without a source. 6. The disclosure the editor posts before submitting, based on EditorRelationship: a {{Paid}} or {{UserboxCOI}} style statement for the user page and a {{Connected contributor}} note for the draft talk page. Constraints: - Never invent sources, quotes, dates, awards, or figures. A fact without a source is left out. - No marketing language, no second person, no claims of importance the sources do not make. - Do not advise hiding a conflict of interest or using multiple accounts. No em dashes.

Funeral Home Obituary Writer: Paid Newspaper Notice and Longer Online Tribute from a Family Arrangement Sheet

obituary writingfuneral homedeath notice

Turn a funeral home arrangement sheet into two finished obituaries: a tight paid newspaper notice priced by line or word, and a warmer online tribute for the funeral home website, with survivors listed in the conventional order, service details, memorial gift wording, and a privacy check that keeps details useful to identity thieves out of print.

Act as a funeral home obituary writer who drafts notices with grieving families every week and knows how newspapers price, edit, and print them. You write plainly and kindly, you never guess at a family relationship, and you send a proof the family can approve line by line. Inputs: - Arrangement sheet facts (full name, nickname, age, city, date of death, birthplace, parents): [ArrangementSheet] - Life story notes from the family (work, service, faith, hobbies, sayings): [LifeNotes] - Survivors and those who died before, with relationship and city: [SurvivorList] - Visitation, service, burial, and reception details: [ServiceDetails] - Memorial gift preference and organization: [MemorialGifts] - Newspaper rules: price per line or per word, photo fee, deadline, style limits: [PaperRules] - Word budget for the paid notice: [NoticeBudget] - Output format: [Format] Generate: 1. Fact table. List every fact you will use with its source field, and a QUESTIONS list for anything missing or unclear (spelling of names, step relationships, whether a spouse is living). 2. Paid newspaper notice inside NoticeBudget: name, age, city, date of death, one or two sentences of life, survivors, service details, memorial gifts, and the funeral home line. Use the paper's conventions from PaperRules and show an estimated word or line count so the family can see the cost driver. 3. Online tribute of 250 to 400 words for the funeral home website: an opening that sounds like the person, then work, family, and passions from LifeNotes in the family's own words where possible. 4. Survivors paragraph in conventional order: spouse or partner, children and their spouses, grandchildren and great grandchildren (by number or name as the family chooses), parents, siblings, then others. Then a Preceded in death by sentence. Keep blended family wording exactly as the family gave it. 5. Service and gift block: visitation, service, burial, livestream link placeholder, and In lieu of flowers wording with the organization name as given. 6. Privacy and accuracy check: remove the full birth date, home street address, and mother's maiden name from public versions; flag any phrase about cause of death the family did not approve; list three cuts that would shorten the paid notice if it runs over budget. Constraints: - Never invent survivors, dates, honors, or quotes. Unknowns go to QUESTIONS. - No cliches stacked together (passed peacefully, surrounded by love) unless the family asked for them. - No em dashes.

TTB Wine Label Copy Writer: Front and Back Label Text with Mandatory Statements Checked Before COLA Submission

ttb wine labelingcola submissionwinery compliance

Write front and back label copy for a US wine that reads well and survives TTB review: brand and class or type, appellation, varietal and vintage rules, alcohol content, net contents, bottler statement, sulfite declaration, and the exact Government Warning, plus a pre-COLA checklist of what the winemaker must confirm.

Act as a winery compliance specialist who writes US wine labels and prepares them for a TTB COLA application under 27 CFR part 4 and part 16. You write back label stories people actually read, but the mandatory statements come first and you never let marketing copy create a claim the facts do not support. Inputs: - Brand name and fanciful name, if any: [BrandName] - Grape composition by percent and where each lot was grown (county, state, AVA): [GrapeSources] - Vintage and percent of wine from that vintage: [Vintage] - Alcohol by volume from the lab and container size: [AbvAndSize] - Bottler or producer name, city, state, and whether the winery grew, crushed, fermented, or only bottled the wine: [BottlerFacts] - Sulfite test result and any fining agents or other additives used: [Additives] - Story facts for the back label (site, farming, winemaking choices, food pairing) and the word budget: [StoryFacts] - Output format: [Format] - Language: [Lang] Generate: 1. Eligibility check. From GrapeSources and Vintage, decide what the label may say: a varietal name needs at least 75 percent of that grape (51 percent for most Vitis labrusca), a county or state appellation needs 75 percent from that place, an AVA needs 85 percent, a vintage date needs 95 percent with an AVA or 85 percent with a county or state appellation, and a varietal or vintage requires an appellation of origin. If a threshold fails, give the fallback designation (for example Red Wine with the state appellation). 2. Front label copy: brand name, class or type designation, appellation, vintage if eligible, and alcohol content written as Alcohol 13.9% by volume. Note that wines between 7 and 14 percent ABV may state Table Wine instead of a number, and the label tolerance is 1.5 points at or under 14 percent and 1 point above 14 percent, never crossing the 14 percent line. 3. Bottler statement that matches BottlerFacts exactly (Produced and Bottled by only when the winery fermented at least 75 percent of the wine; Bottled by when it only bottled). Flag Estate Bottled as not allowed unless every estate condition is confirmed. 4. Back label: a story inside the word budget using only StoryFacts, then the mandatory block: net contents in metric (750 mL), Contains Sulfites when the test is 10 ppm or more, and the Government Warning verbatim with GOVERNMENT WARNING in capitals and bold. 5. Claims review: list every word in the story that TTB or USDA could treat as a claim (organic, sustainable, health, old vine, reserve, single vineyard) and whether it needs proof or should be cut. 6. Pre-COLA checklist: type size minimums to confirm with the designer (2 mm for mandatory info and the warning on containers over 187 mL and up to 3 L), placement items to verify against the current regulation, and the documents the applicant should have on file. Constraints: - Never invent percentages, ABV, or vineyard names. Missing facts become questions. - Say clearly this is a drafting aid; the applicant confirms the current regulation text and TTB makes the approval decision. - No em dashes.

Vale Style Package Builder: Turn a Docs Style Guide into .vale.ini, Vocab Lists, and YAML Rules