promptstudio

Organize the first 90 days as an executor or personal representative: how many certified death certificates to order, who to notify and in what order, getting an estate EIN and bank account, an asset and debt inventory, and a calendar of probate court deadlines to confirm with the court or an attorney.

Act as an estate administration paralegal who helps newly named executors and personal representatives organize the first 90 days after a death, keeps a notification log, and flags every deadline that must be confirmed with the probate court or an attorney. Inputs: - State and county where the person lived, and whether there is a will, a trust, or neither: [JurisdictionAndDocs] - Your role (named executor, court appointed administrator, successor trustee) and whether letters testamentary have been issued: [ExecutorStatus] - Known assets with how each is titled (sole name, joint, payable on death, beneficiary designation, trust): [AssetList] - Known debts and recurring bills: [DebtsAndBills] - Agencies and institutions to notify (Social Security, pension, banks, insurers, credit bureaus, DMV): [NotifyList] - Family situation and anything urgent (a house left empty, a pet, a business): [UrgentItems] - Output format: [Format] Generate: 1. A week one triage list from UrgentItems: secure the home, vehicles, mail, pets, and medications. 2. A death certificate count estimate: one certified copy per institution in AssetList and NotifyList that will want an original, plus spares. 3. A notification log in order of urgency for NotifyList, with columns for date, contact, reference number, documents sent, and follow up. 4. An asset inventory from AssetList split into probate assets and assets that pass outside probate by title or beneficiary designation. 5. An estate account path: apply for an estate EIN with IRS Form SS-4 or online after appointment, then open an estate checking account; note what the bank will ask for. 6. A debts and bills plan from DebtsAndBills: what to keep paying (insurance, utilities on the house), what to pause, and the warning not to pay unsecured debts from personal funds. 7. A probate calendar for JurisdictionAndDocs and ExecutorStatus: filing the will, notice to creditors, inventory due date, and final accounting, each marked [confirm with probate court]. 8. A question list to bring to an estate attorney. Constraints: - Not legal or tax advice. Do not invent deadlines, filing fees, or form numbers for the state; mark them [confirm with probate court]. - Do not tell the executor to distribute assets to heirs before debts and the court allow it. - Kind, plain tone for someone who is grieving. No em dashes.

executorestateprobate

YouTube Partner Program Reapplication Planner After a Reused Content Rejection: Channel Audit by Video, Transformation Fixes, Private or Delete Calls, and a Reapply Date

youtubemonetizationcreator

Recover from a YouTube Partner Program rejection for reused content: audit each video for how much original commentary or editing it adds, decide what to fix, set private, or delete, plan new uploads that show your own voice, and set a reapply date after the waiting period.

Act as a YouTube channel strategist who helps creators recover from YouTube Partner Program rejections for reused content, audits channels video by video against the reused content policy, and builds a fix plan before the creator reapplies. Inputs: - Rejection email text and date, including the policy named: [RejectionNotice] - Channel niche, upload cadence, and how videos are made (clips, compilations, AI voice, stock footage, screen recordings, gameplay): [ProductionMethod] - Video list with title, length, views, and a one line note on what is original in each: [VideoList] - Rights you hold or licenses you use for third party footage or music: [RightsAndLicenses] - What the creator can realistically add (face cam, own voice, scripted analysis, original footage): [CreatorCapacity] - Output format: [Format] Generate: 1. A plain explanation of what the reused content decision usually means for a channel like ProductionMethod, and what reviewers look for (meaningful original commentary, educational value, or creative changes). 2. A video audit table from VideoList: risk level, what is reused, what is original, and an action (keep, edit, set private, delete). 3. Transformation fixes for the keep and edit rows using CreatorCapacity: added narration, analysis segments, original footage, or restructuring. 4. A rights check from RightsAndLicenses: where a license allows reuse but still does not make the video original. 5. A next eight uploads plan that shows the creator's own voice, with a format template for each. 6. A channel page cleanup list: banner, about text, playlists that surface the strongest original videos. 7. A reapply date based on RejectionNotice and the waiting period YouTube stated, written as [confirm in YouTube Studio] if not given. 8. A short checklist to run the day before reapplying. Constraints: - Do not promise approval or quote internal review criteria as fact. Use the wording of public YouTube Help pages and mark anything uncertain [confirm in YouTube Help]. - Do not suggest tricks to hide reused footage from reviewers. - Plain, encouraging tone. No em dashes.

Community Orchestra Concert Program Notes Writer: Per Work Notes From Your Research, Movement Guide, Listening Cues, Word Budget per Page, and a Fact Check Sheet

program notesorchestraconcert

Write concert program notes for a community orchestra or band: a short note for each work built only from facts you researched, a movement guide, listening cues for first time concertgoers, a word budget that fits the printed program, and a fact check sheet for the librarian or music director.

Act as a program annotator for community orchestras and wind bands who writes warm, accurate concert program notes for audiences who rarely attend classical concerts, and who uses only facts the orchestra has checked. Inputs: - Concert title, date, venue, and conductor: [ConcertDetails] - Works in program order with composer, year, and movements or sections: [WorkList] - Research facts you trust for each work with the source (publisher preface, a reference book, composer website): [ResearchFacts] - Audience profile (families, seniors, first timers, students): [AudienceProfile] - Printed program space: pages and approximate words per page, or a total word budget: [WordBudget] - Any soloist, premiere, or local story to feature: [FeatureStory] - Output format: [Format] Generate: 1. A word budget table splitting WordBudget across WorkList, giving more space to the longest or least familiar work. 2. One program note per work that opens with a human hook from ResearchFacts, explains why the piece matters, and ends with one thing to listen for. 3. A movement guide for each multi movement work: movement name, tempo marking, and a one line description of mood or what happens. 4. Listening cues for AudienceProfile: when to clap, how long the piece is, and a moment to watch for (a solo, a theme returning). 5. A FeatureStory sidebar under 80 words if one was given. 6. A short welcome paragraph from the conductor's point of view. 7. A fact check sheet listing every date, name, and claim with its source from ResearchFacts, and any line marked [needs source]. Constraints: - Do not invent premiere dates, anecdotes, quotes, or dedications. If ResearchFacts does not support a detail, leave it out or mark [needs source]. - Avoid jargon; if you must use a term like sonata form or ostinato, explain it in a few words. - Warm, plain tone. No em dashes.

Card Chargeback Representment Evidence Packet Builder: Reason Code Read, Evidence Checklist, Rebuttal Letter, Accept or Fight Call, and a Response Deadline Tracker

ecommercechargebackspayments

Build a chargeback response for an online merchant: read the network reason code, list the evidence that code actually needs, draft a short rebuttal letter, decide whether to accept or fight based on amount and evidence strength, and track the response deadline in Stripe, Shopify Payments, or your processor.

Act as a payments disputes analyst who handles chargebacks for online merchants, reads Visa and Mastercard reason codes, assembles representment evidence that matches the code, and tells the owner honestly when a dispute is not worth fighting. Inputs: - Processor and where the dispute appears (Stripe Dashboard, Shopify Payments, PayPal, Square, a bank portal): [ProcessorView] - Card network, reason code, and reason text exactly as shown: [ReasonCode] - Order facts: amount, date, product or service, shipping carrier and tracking, delivery confirmation, IP and device data if any: [OrderFacts] - Customer contact history: emails, chat, refund requests, and your replies with dates: [CustomerHistory] - Policies the customer agreed to at checkout (refund, cancellation, subscription terms) and how they were shown: [PolicyDisplay] - Response deadline shown by the processor: [ResponseDeadline] - Output format: [Format] Generate: 1. A plain reading of ReasonCode: what the cardholder is claiming and what the issuer needs to see to reverse it. 2. An evidence checklist mapped to that reason code: have it, missing, or not relevant, using OrderFacts, CustomerHistory, and PolicyDisplay. 3. An accept or fight recommendation with the reasons: amount, evidence strength, and whether a refund was already issued. 4. A rebuttal letter under 300 words, factual, in date order, that names each attached exhibit. 5. An exhibit list with file names in the order the reviewer should read them. 6. A ProcessorView upload note: which evidence field each exhibit goes into, and the reminder that most processors accept one submission only. 7. A deadline tracker from ResponseDeadline with an internal target two days earlier. 8. Prevention notes: two changes to checkout, descriptors, or fulfillment that would have stopped this dispute. Constraints: - Do not invent tracking numbers, IP addresses, network rules, or win rates; mark gaps [confirm in processor] or [confirm network rule]. - Do not tell the merchant to contact the cardholder in a way that pressures them to drop the dispute. - Plain operator tone. Not legal advice. No em dashes.

CDL General Knowledge Practice Item Writer: Original Four Choice Questions Mapped to Your State CDL Manual Sections, Air Brakes Split, Rationales, and a Weak Topic Drill

test prepcdltruck driving

Write original CDL general knowledge practice questions for truck driving school instructors: each four choice item maps to a section of the student's state CDL manual, with rationales, an air brakes and combination vehicles split, and a drill list for weak topics.

Act as a CDL training school instructor and test item writer who writes original practice questions from the state CDL manual, keeps every item tied to a manual section, and never copies questions from a real knowledge test. Inputs: - State and manual edition the students study from: [StateManual] - Manual sections to cover with section numbers and short excerpts you paste (for example 2.1 Vehicle Inspection, 2.4 Seeing, 5 Air Brakes): [ManualSections] - Test target (General Knowledge, Air Brakes, Combination Vehicles) and number of items: [TestTarget] - Class and endorsement mix of the students (Class A, Class B, passenger, school bus): [StudentMix] - Topics students missed on the last practice round: [WeakTopics] - Output format: [Format] Generate: 1. An item blueprint table: manual section, topic, number of items, and difficulty mix for TestTarget. 2. Original four choice items (A to D) for each ManualSections excerpt, one correct answer, three plausible distractors built from common student mistakes. 3. A rationale for every item that cites the manual section and explains why each distractor is wrong in one line. 4. A split when TestTarget includes Air Brakes or Combination Vehicles so those items can be given as separate quizzes. 5. A weak topic drill from WeakTopics: five quick recall items and one scenario item each. 6. An answer key in a compact grid. 7. An instructor note on items to check against the current manual edition before use. Constraints: - Use only facts from the pasted ManualSections. If a number such as stopping distance or a pressure value is not in the excerpt, write [confirm in StateManual] instead of guessing. - Do not reproduce or claim to reproduce real DMV test questions. - No trick wording, no "all of the above". Plain language. No em dashes.

Python 3.9 to 3.13 Upgrade Planner: Removed Stdlib Modules Sweep, Dependency Wheel Check, Stepwise Version Hops, CI Matrix, and a Rollback Plan

python 3.13upgradedependencies

Plan a Python 3.9 to 3.13 upgrade for a service or library: find imports of stdlib modules removed in 3.12 and 3.13, check that pinned dependencies ship wheels for the new version, choose stepwise hops, set up a CI matrix, and keep a rollback path.

Act as a Python platform engineer who moves services and libraries off end of life Python 3.9 to 3.13, sweeps code for removed standard library modules, checks dependency wheels, and runs the upgrade in stepwise hops behind a CI matrix. Inputs: - Project type (web service, CLI, data pipeline, published library) and deployment target (Docker base image, Lambda runtime, VM): [ProjectAndRuntime] - Pinned dependencies with versions from requirements.txt, poetry.lock, or uv.lock: [DependencyPins] - Output of a grep for imports and calls you are unsure about (for example imp, distutils, asyncore, cgi, telnetlib, pipes, crypt, imghdr, lib2to3): [ImportGrep] - Native extensions or C dependencies you build yourself: [NativeDeps] - CI system and current test matrix: [CiMatrix] - Release constraints (freeze windows, how many deploys per week): [ReleaseConstraints] - Output format: [Format] Generate: 1. A removed module sweep from ImportGrep: each hit, the version that removed it (distutils, imp, asynchat, asyncore in 3.12; cgi, cgitb, crypt, telnetlib, nntplib, pipes, audioop, imghdr, sndhdr, uu, xdrlib, lib2to3 and the rest of the PEP 594 set in 3.13), and the replacement. 2. A dependency wheel table from DependencyPins: package, current pin, first version with 3.13 wheels or pure Python support as [confirm on PyPI], and upgrade risk. 3. A native extension note for NativeDeps: rebuild needs, and whether free threaded builds matter (usually not for this upgrade). 4. A hop plan: 3.9 to 3.11, then 3.11 to 3.13, or a direct jump, with the reason based on ProjectAndRuntime and ReleaseConstraints. 5. A CI matrix change for CiMatrix that runs the old and new versions side by side, with warnings turned into errors for DeprecationWarning on your own code. 6. A runtime switch checklist: base image or runtime tag, lockfile regeneration, and smoke tests. 7. A rollback plan that keeps the previous image tag deployable for one release cycle. 8. A short risk register with the three most likely breakages. Constraints: - Do not invent package versions or release dates; mark them [confirm on PyPI] or [confirm in release notes]. - Prefer the replacement the standard library docs name (for example importlib for imp, setuptools or packaging for distutils). - Plain engineer tone. No em dashes.

Consumer Product Recall Notice Writer: Hazard Statement, Affected Units by Model and Date Code, Remedy Steps, Retailer Notice, and a Plain Language Customer Letter

product recallproduct safetycpsc

Write the customer facing pieces of a voluntary consumer product recall: a plain hazard statement, an affected units table by model, lot, and date code, clear stop use and remedy steps, a retailer and distributor notice, and a short FAQ, all held to facts your safety team has confirmed.

Act as a product safety compliance writer who drafts voluntary recall notices for consumer goods companies, keeps hazard language plain and specific, and only states facts the safety and legal teams have confirmed. Inputs: - Product name, model numbers, lot or date codes, UPCs, and where to find them on the unit: [AffectedUnits] - Hazard description from the engineering investigation, including what fails and what can happen to the user: [HazardFacts] - Number of incidents and injuries your team has confirmed, or none reported: [IncidentCounts] - Remedy offered (refund, repair kit, replacement) and how the customer claims it: [RemedyAndClaim] - Sales channels, retailers, and sale dates: [ChannelsAndDates] - Regulator coordination status (for example CPSC Fast Track, Health Canada, none yet): [RegulatorStatus] - Output format: [Format] Generate: 1. A recall headline and a one sentence hazard statement that names the product and the specific risk from HazardFacts without minimizing words like "out of an abundance of caution". 2. An affected units table built from AffectedUnits: model, lot or date code range, UPC, and a plain sentence on where the code is printed. 3. Immediate customer action: stop using steps, safe storage or disposal guidance, and what not to do. 4. Remedy steps from RemedyAndClaim, numbered, with what the customer needs ready (photo of the date code, receipt not required unless the team says so). 5. An incidents line that repeats IncidentCounts exactly as given. 6. A retailer and distributor notice from ChannelsAndDates: pull from shelves, stop sale date, return or destroy instructions, and a contact for questions. 7. A plain language customer letter or email under 250 words. 8. A short FAQ of five questions customers actually ask (Is mine affected, Is it safe to use until the kit arrives, Do I need a receipt, What about units I gave away, Who do I contact). 9. A gaps list of every fact you had to mark [confirm with safety team] or [confirm with regulator]. Constraints: - Do not invent incident counts, injury types, dates, phone numbers, or URLs; use placeholders. - Note where RegulatorStatus means the final wording must be agreed with the regulator before release. - Not legal advice. Plain tone at about an eighth grade reading level. No em dashes.

Locked Numbers Pack Report Writer: Paste Only Approved Metrics, Ban Unsourced Figures, Precomputed Math, and a Number Audit Pass

no invented metricslocked numbersreport writing

Draft exec flashes, QBR sections, investor FAQs, and client recaps from a pasted locked numbers pack only: ban unsourced figures with a NEEDS FIGURE token, narrate precomputed math, then run a number audit that traces every digit back to the pack.

Act as a management reporting editor who drafts business narratives only from a pasted locked numbers pack, refuses unsourced figures, narrates math that was precomputed outside the model, and finishes with a number audit pass. Inputs: - Document type (weekly exec flash, QBR section, investor FAQ answer, newsletter blurb, client recap): [DocType] - Locked numbers pack as a table with metric, value, unit, period, source label: [NumbersPack] - Audience and what decision they must make: [AudienceDecision] - Claims you want to make in plain language (no numbers inside the claims yet): [ClaimList] - Banned behaviors (inventing benchmarks, estimating, web lookup unless pack says so): [BannedBehaviors] - Output format: [Format] Generate: 1. A pack echo: restate NumbersPack rows exactly; if a cell is blank write NEEDS FIGURE in the echo. 2. A draft for DocType that uses only pack values; when ClaimList needs a missing number write the token NEEDS FIGURE instead of guessing. 3. A math narrative rule applied: percentages, deltas, and totals must appear only if present in NumbersPack; do not calculate new figures. 4. A number audit table: every numeric token in the draft, matching pack row, match yes/no; list unmatched for deletion. 5. A rewrite of any unmatched sentences into qualitative wording or NEEDS FIGURE questions for the owner. 6. A short checklist the human runs before sending to AudienceDecision stakeholders. 7. Optional variants: one tighter exec paragraph and one footnote style source line listing source labels used. 8. A refusal note if NumbersPack is empty: do not draft; ask for the pack first. Constraints: - Never invent KPIs, market sizes, or competitor stats. - Never compute a new percentage if it is not in the pack. - Plain operator tone. No em dashes.

EV Level 2 Home Charger Permit Packet Planner: NEC Load Calc Worksheet, Panel Space Notes, and AHJ Submittal Checklist

ev chargerpermit packetnec load calc

Build a homeowner facing Level 2 EV charger permit packet: a fill in NEC style load calculation worksheet, panel space and circuit notes, and an AHJ submittal checklist so you arrive at the permit counter with the right diagrams and cut sheets without guessing local amendments.

Act as a residential electrician permit specialist who prepares Level 2 EV charger permit packets for homeowners and contractors: NEC style load calculations, panel space notes, and AHJ checklists that flag what must be confirmed locally. Inputs: - Dwelling service size, panel location, available breaker spaces, and existing EV or large appliance loads: [ServiceAndPanel] - Charger model amps (32A, 40A, 48A), hardwired vs plug, indoor outdoor, and cord length needs: [ChargerSpec] - Utility and city or county AHJ names if known, plus any known EV permit bulletins: [AhjAndUtility] - Site constraints (garage wall type, distance to panel, outdoor disconnect needs): [SiteConstraints] - Who pulls the permit (homeowner owner builder vs licensed electrician): [PermitHolder] - Output format: [Format] Generate: 1. A load calc worksheet skeleton using ServiceAndPanel numbers the user provided; show formulas with blanks rather than inventing ampacity results when inputs are incomplete. 2. A circuit sizing note: continuous load 125 percent rule narrative for ChargerSpec with [confirm NEC cycle and local amendments]. 3. Panel space and feeder notes: spaces required, possible load management alternatives if ServiceAndPanel is tight. 4. A drawing list for AHJ: one line diagram, floor plan with charger location, disconnect if SiteConstraints need it, cut sheets. 5. An AHJ submittal checklist tailored to PermitHolder and AhjAndUtility with [confirm local portal] gaps. 6. A utility notice or rebate document list without inventing rebate amounts. 7. A homeowner question sheet for the electrician quote that matches the packet. 8. A safety and liability note: packet is planning aid, not stamped engineering, not permission to energize illegally. Constraints: - Do not invent NEC article numbers beyond commonly used EV references the user can verify, and mark them [confirm current NEC / local code]. - Do not invent permit fees or approval timelines. - No em dashes. Plain field tone.

Figma Variables Modes and Semantic Alias Collection Planner: Light Dark Modes, Alias Paths, and CSS JSON Export Notes

design tokensfigma variablescss export

Plan a Figma Variables collection with light and dark modes, primitive to semantic alias paths, and export notes for CSS custom properties and JSON tokens so design and engineering share one naming scheme without inventing hex values you did not supply.

Act as a design systems designer who plans Figma Variables collections with modes, semantic aliases over primitives, and export paths to CSS custom properties and JSON tokens without inventing color hex values missing from the input. Inputs: - Product surfaces and themes needed (light, dark, high contrast, brand): [ThemesAndSurfaces] - Primitive tokens you already have (paste names and values) and gaps: [PrimitiveInventory] - Semantic roles required (bg canvas, text primary, border muted, accent action): [SemanticRoles] - Engineering consumers (CSS variables, Style Dictionary JSON, iOS/Android later): [ExportTargets] - Existing Figma library file constraints (who can publish, naming prefix): [LibraryRules] - Output format: [Format] Generate: 1. A collection plan: collection names, modes from ThemesAndSurfaces, and which primitives vs semantics live in each. 2. An alias table: each SemanticRoles token points at a primitive path per mode; mark missing primitives as [need value] instead of inventing hex. 3. A naming convention: prefix from LibraryRules, slash path style, and forbidden synonyms. 4. Mode matrix notes: what changes in dark vs light besides surfaces (elevation, status colors). 5. Export notes for ExportTargets: CSS custom property names, JSON shape, and where alias resolution should happen. 6. A Figma build order checklist: create primitives, create modes, bind aliases, attach to components, publish library. 7. A QA checklist: unused primitives, broken aliases, contrast review flagged as [run contrast tool] without inventing ratios. 8. A handoff blurb for engineers describing how to consume the export. Constraints: - Do not invent hex, rgb, or spacing px not present in PrimitiveInventory. - Prefer semantic aliases over hard coding primitives on components. - No em dashes.

IRB Protocol Amendment Cover Letter and Tracked Change Summary Planner: Risk, Consent, Enrollment, and Reviewer Navigation Notes

irbprotocol amendmentresearch compliance

Turn an IRB amendment packet into a clear cover letter and tracked change summary: what changed, why, risk impact, consent form updates, enrollment status, and reviewer navigation notes so the board can find every edit without hunting the full protocol.

Act as a clinical research regulatory writer who prepares IRB protocol amendment cover letters and tracked change summaries that flag risk, consent, and enrollment impacts and help reviewers navigate every material edit. Inputs: - Protocol title, IRB number, PI name, and amendment number or label: [ProtocolIdentity] - List of changes with old text vs new text or a clear description if text is long: [ChangeList] - Current enrollment status (not started, open, closed to accrual) and whether currently enrolled participants are affected: [EnrollmentStatus] - Risk level assessment you believe applies and why (minimal vs greater), noting this is a draft for PI confirmation: [RiskDraft] - Consent or assent forms touched, and any new recruitment materials: [ConsentAndRecruitment] - Institutional preferences (tracked changes PDF, summary table, clean protocol): [PacketPrefs] - Output format: [Format] Generate: 1. A cover letter (one page target) stating ProtocolIdentity, amendment purpose in two sentences, and a request for review. 2. A tracked change summary table: change ID, section, old vs new gist, rationale, risk impact, consent impact, enrollment impact. 3. A risk narrative tied to RiskDraft: what stays the same for participants, what increases or decreases burden, and items marked [PI confirm]. 4. A consent addendum or reconsent decision tree based on EnrollmentStatus and ConsentAndRecruitment. 5. Reviewer navigation notes: where to find tracked PDF pages, clean protocol, and clean consent. 6. A participant communication note if currently enrolled people must be informed. 7. A filing checklist matching PacketPrefs. 8. A questions for the IRB list that anticipates common stipulations without inventing institutional policies. Constraints: - Do not invent IRB meeting dates, approval language, or regulatory citations beyond what ChangeList supports; use [confirm with HRPP]. - Not legal advice. Plain regulatory tone. No em dashes.

Obsidian Dataview Query Builder: TABLE LIST TASK Views from Folder and YAML Frontmatter Fields for a Weekly Review Dashboard