A brief for an AI must contain the information necessary for the task, not the entire client file. Use public elements, fictional examples and minimized formulations. Check the service usage framework before entering internal data.
Distinguish between public and internal information
The public description of an offer, its audience and its tone constraints may be enough to prepare a plan. An export of contacts, nominative exchanges or an unpublished strategy add risks without always being useful. Take an inventory of the information required by the task, then remove the rest. The public status of a document must be verified, not deduced from its ease of access.
Decide what information enters the brief
Before copying a document, write down the task at hand. To produce an article plan, the model may need to know the public, the offer and the mistakes to avoid; He does not necessarily need to know the customers who asked the questions. The minimization must therefore be done from the task. Deleting a name does not automatically make an anonymous folder when the rest allows you to recognize a person.
| Information available | Proposed treatment | Pre-use control |
|---|---|---|
| Public description of an offer | Resume updated version | Is the service still offered? |
| Question received from a customer | Rephrase without context unnecessary identifier | Does the situation still identify someone? |
| Contact list | Do not include it to request a plan | What need for the task would justify this sharing? |
| Sensitive internal procedure | Use a demonstration example or an approved tool | Who validates use and access? |
| Testimonial to be published | process it in a separate validation circuit | Is the content and its use allowed? |
This grid is an organizational method, not a legal decision applicable to all files. The CNIL explains the precautions related to the use of generative systems. For a concrete case containing personal data or specific obligations, have the framework and tool validated by the competent managers before sharing.
make a working example
Replace the actual file with a fictitious situation retaining only the useful constraints: sector, type of need, expected length and limits of the offer. Changing a name is not enough if the whole context identifies the person. For a first workshop, ask the team to produce a fully invented example and explain what information has been voluntarily omitted.
Check the service and authorized uses
The CNIL recommends training users and submitting only information that they are authorized to share. Before professional use, have the settings, accesses and processing conditions examined for your service examined. A disabled option in an interface does not replace a clear internal policy. If in doubt about a document, use another working material.
Fictional example: preparing a newsletter
A team wants to turn customer feedback into article ideas. It summarizes the themes in an aggregate way, removes identities and project details, then requests writing angles. Actual citations are processed separately and are published only after appropriate validation. The model does not need the subscriber list to offer a newsletter structure.
An example of a brief that does not depend on a real file
In a fictional demonstration, an agency prepares an article for leaders who want to take over a site. The brief may indicate: public not very technical, objective of preparing a first exchange, limited offer to the study of a recovery, absence of universal price and need to examine access. He asks for a plan, questions to check and missing information. No nominative history or login document is required.
- First write the brief with public information and an invented situation. Verify that it actually allows you to work before considering additional data.
- Have the exclusions and commercial promises confirmed by the person responsible for the offer. The model should not complement these points in likelihood.
- Reread the output by searching for invented references, sourceless figures and formulations that suggest an unvalidated commitment. Remove what cannot be justified.
- Keep the approved brief and the publishing decision in the intended work location. Plan for deleting or archiving the tests according to team policy.
For the production of the site, the expected result is a verifiable writing material, not a new database of scattered customer files. The Affirmations and Sources Register Complete this work by controlling what comes out of the model. Both checks are necessary: limiting the inputs does not prevent an output from inventing a fact, and re-reading an output does not justify an excessive sharing at the start.
Review the outputs as well
A response can invent a reference, statistic or testimony even if the brief is cautious. Check these items before broadcast. Plan a responsible person, an approved workplace and a rule to remove unnecessary trials. Keep a version of the reusable brief, devoid of secrets, in your method of Editorial production assisted by AI.