Communicate

Update a senior partner on a matter

Turns a messy status into an under-120-word email the partner can answer in one word, with a stated default action if they never reply.

About 5 minstarter

Your prompt4,264 characters

Still to fill in: Matter, The partner and how they read, Status and risk, Decision needed

RoleYou are a senior associate writing for a partner who reads the first two lines on a phone and forwards the rest to the client. You put the decision in front of them, not the reasoning that got you there, and you never end an email with "thoughts?"What I needDraft the internal update on Matter for The partner and how they read. It has to be answerable in one word.InputsMatter: Matter Who it goes to: The partner and how they read Deadline or constraint: Deadline or constraint Status and risk: Status and risk Decision needed: Decision neededHow to work this1. Write the subject line so it sorts in a full inbox and answers half the question: matter, topic, state of play. "Smith v. Acme; Acme produced nothing; motion to compel due Friday" beats "Quick question." 2. Open with one sentence stating where the matter stands, past tense, with a date. No throat-clearing, no "I just wanted to flag." 3. Compress Status and risk into exactly three bullets (Status, Risk, Decision needed), one line each, and frame Decision needed so The partner and how they read can answer with one word or by picking A or B. Give each option its consequence in about five words. 4. State what I will do absent a reply, and by when, using Deadline or constraint; that converts silence into a decision instead of a delay. Keep the body under 120 words before the sign-off, and tell me the count.Close with these four sections, every time, without being askedAssumptions I made. What I assumed the partner already knows about this matter, whether the deadline is firm, whether the client has been told, and anything I inferred from your shorthand. Mark each [verify] or [safe]. Where this is weakest. The one line most likely to draw "call me" instead of an answer, and why it fails to close. What only you can decide. Judgment calls, each as options with tradeoffs. At minimum: whether to include your recommendation. Recommending gets a faster yes and shows judgment, but a partner who wanted to weigh it themselves reads it as pre-deciding, and if it goes wrong it is now your call; and whether the client goes on this thread. Copying them saves a relay and shows responsiveness, but it commits the partner to a position in front of the client before they have taken one. What would make this materially better. What you could tell me that would sharpen the next draft: the actual deadline, the partner's prior instruction on this issue, the client's appetite for motion practice. Rank by impact.Output formatSubject line. One status sentence. Three bullets labeled Status, Risk, Decision needed. The default action with its date. Sign-off. Word count in parentheses. Then the four sections above, below a horizontal rule, so I can delete them before sending.Never do this- An update that would fit any matter on any partner's desk is too generic. Name the case, the date, the number, and the deadline. - No throat-clearing and no hedging. Cut "I just wanted to flag," "arguably," "it should be noted," and "please let me know your thoughts." Do not tell me to consult an attorney. We are both attorneys. - Every date, deadline, rule, and number must come from my inputs or be marked [UNVERIFIED - check the docket]. Never invent a hearing date or a discovery cutoff. A partner who forwards a wrong date to a client remembers who typed it. - If you do not know whether the client has been told or whether the deadline is firm, put it in the assumptions rather than writing around it. - No padding. If the honest update is three sentences, write three sentences. Length is not value to someone reading two lines in an elevator.Before you answer- Could The partner and how they read answer this with one word? - Is the body under 120 words, and did I report the count? - Does the subject line carry the matter, the topic, and the state of play? - Is there a stated default action with a date if nobody replies? - Is any date or deadline here something I supplied, or did you produce it? - Change the caption: would this email still work? It should not.

Adds driver's-seat tunes: options instead of answers, questions before work, every citation flagged. Your values come with it.

Pressure-test it

Makes the AI switch hats and attack its own answer.

You are the partner this was written for: phone in hand, sixty unread messages behind it, one client meeting behind you and another four minutes out. Answer it as the partner would: do you reply, flag it for later, or write back "call me"? If the answer is anything but one word, name the exact sentence that cost you the decision and rewrite the email so it does not happen again.

Go deeper

Pushes the work further once the basics are right.

The partner reads it, says nothing, and the deadline keeps moving toward us. Write the 24-hour follow-up: same format, one line on what is pending, the new deadline, and the action I will take at a stated hour if I do not hear back. Then write the one-line version I would send on chat instead of email.

Before you run it

What to gather first

The matter and where it actually stands today
The risk you want on the partner's radar, in one line
The decision you need, framed as two options
How this partner reads and decides: phone, volume, tolerance for detail
The deadline that makes this urgent

Watch for

If the partner is supposed to decide, do not decide for them. Give two options with consequences and label any recommendation clearly as yours.
The model will produce dates and deadlines that look plausible and are not. Check every date against the docket and the scheduling order before you send.
Mark internal strategy communications privileged, and watch the copy line. An inflated cc list on an internal assessment travels further than you intend.
Brevity is respect, but do not compress a real problem into a bullet. If the risk is serious, say so and ask for ten minutes instead of a reply.

What comes back

A subject line carrying matter, topic, and state of play; one status sentence with a date; three one-line bullets labeled Status, Risk, and Decision needed; a stated default action with its date; a sign-off; a word count; and, below a rule, the four collaboration sections to delete before sending.

See an example of what you’ll get

Subject: Smith v. Acme; Acme served objections and zero documents; motion to compel due Friday Acme served its RFP responses last night, April 28, with form objections and no production. - Status: 18 of 22 requests answered "overbroad and unduly burdensome"; zero documents produced. - Risk: Accepting this slips the Rivera deposition past the August 15 cutoff, and we lose the comparator files the MSJ needs. - Decision needed: Move to compel Friday (2 days of drafting, Illman has been pro-production), or one more meet-and-confer round (cheaper, likely another two weeks of nothing)? Absent word from you by 5:00 Wednesday, I will start the motion so Friday stays available. J. *(97 words)* --- Assumptions I made. That Kate knows the August 15 cutoff without being reminded [safe]. That the client has not seen the responses yet [verify]. That the meet-and-confer certification requirement in this district has already been satisfied by your April 22 letter [verify - if not, the Friday filing is not available]. That Magistrate Illman's recent rulings are as favorable as your note suggests [verify - I have no docket access]. Where this is weakest. The Decision needed bullet runs long and carries two parentheticals; a partner skimming may read it as analysis rather than a question and defer it. If she is a one-glance reader, cut the parentheticals and put the recommendation in the default line instead. What only you can decide. Whether to include your recommendation: saying "I would file" gets a faster yes and shows judgment, but if Kate wanted to weigh the relationship cost with Acme's counsel herself, it reads as pre-deciding, and a bad outcome is now attributed to you. Second: whether the client goes on this thread. Copying Maria saves a relay and shows responsiveness, but it commits Kate to a position on motion practice in front of the client before she has taken one. Third: whether this is an email at all; if the answer depends on a history with opposing counsel you were not part of, ninety seconds on the phone beats a perfect email. What would make this materially better. (1) Confirmation that the April 22 letter satisfies the meet-and-confer prerequisite: it is the only thing that could make Friday impossible. (2) Kate's prior instruction on discovery motions in this matter, if she gave one. (3) Whether the client has a budget ceiling this quarter that a motion would breach.

Why this prompt is built the way it is

## Framework 1. **Subject line that sorts and answers.** Matter, topic, state of play. Never "Quick question." 2. **First sentence: where we are.** Past tense, with a date. No "I just wanted to flag." 3. **Three bullets: Status, Risk, Decision needed.** One line each, and the decision is answerable in one word or by picking A or B, each option with its consequence in about five words. Never "thoughts?" 4. **State the default, then count the words.** What you will do absent a reply and when, so silence becomes a decision rather than a delay. Under 120 words, counted honestly.