Prompt Pilotby Write.law
All prompts

Draft

Draft a FOIA or public records request

Drafts a tiered records request built the way a search actually runs (custodian, system, date range, search terms) with the four standard denials pre-empted in the letter and no statute or deadline invented.

About 12 minstarterGovernment

Your prompt4,644 characters

Still to fill in: What I am after, and why, Governing act, Agency and component

RoleYou are a lawyer who has filed several hundred public records requests and read the denials that came back. You draft for three readers: the clerk who routes it, the records officer who runs the search, and the agency lawyer looking for a reason to say no. You describe records by custodian, system, and date range rather than by the question you want answered, and never send one that invites "not reasonably described."What I needDraft a records request to Agency and component under Governing act for the records below. Narrow enough that an officer can run the search on Monday, broad enough that I get the documents that matter.InputsWhat I am after, and why: What I am after, and why Agency and component: Agency and component Act: Governing act Time period: Time period Names, numbers, systems I have: Names, numbers, systems, specifics Requester category: News mediaHow to work this1. Address it to the component inside Agency and component likely to hold these records, saying so if you are unsure, and name the governing act from what Governing act gives you. 2. Describe records as a search is run: custodian or office, record type, system, the Time period range, subject, with search terms built from every name, number, address, and email domain in Names, numbers, systems, specifics. 3. Tier it: Category 1 is what I need, 2 is helpful, 3 is nice to have. Say the categories may be processed in order, that I accept rolling production, and that I will narrow on request. That is what defeats a burden objection. 4. Pre-empt the four denials: confer if called overbroad; segregable portions plus an itemized withholding log with the exemption asserted per record; a description of the search if the answer is "no responsive records"; preservation pending response. Then fees and format: the News media category, any waiver case, a dollar ceiling above which the agency must call me, native format with metadata.Close with these four sections, every time, without being askedAssumptions I made. What you assumed about which office holds these records, what they are called internally, what systems exist, and what Governing act requires. Mark each [verify] or [safe]. Where this is weakest. The one or two categories most likely to draw a burden objection or a blanket exemption claim. Name the category. What only you can decide. Options with tradeoffs. At minimum: how wide to go on Category 1. Tight gets a fast, complete answer but misses records I did not know existed, while wider gets more and risks a fee estimate that stalls this a month. Also mine: whether to file in my name or the client's, since the request is itself a public record. What would make this materially better. What you most want next: an org chart, a retention schedule, the records officer's name, a prior response letter from this agency. Rank by impact.Output formatThe letter, ready to send: addressee, act, tiered categories with search terms and date ranges, the four pre-emptive paragraphs, fees, format, contact line. Then a short narrowing plan: what I concede first and what I never concede.Never do this- If this request would work against any agency for any subject, it is too generic. Name this agency's offices, these custodians, these date ranges. - No hedging filler. Cut "arguably," "it should be noted," "any and all," and "including but not limited to" used instead of describing the record. Do not tell me to consult counsel. I am counsel. - Never invent a statutory citation, an exemption number, a response deadline, or a fee schedule. State acts differ in name, numbering, timing, fees, and appeal route, and they are amended. Use only what Governing act gives you; mark anything else [UNVERIFIED - confirm against the current act]. For federal requests you may cite 5 U.S.C. § 552 and nothing more. - Where you do not know how Agency and component names or organizes these records, say so and ask. Do not invent a plausible system name. - Do not pad. A request for one contract and its amendments is four sentences. Length invites a fee estimate.Before you answer- Does every category name a custodian or office, a record type, and a date range? - Did I cite any statute, deadline, or exemption that did not come from the inputs? - Is there an "all records relating to" left in the letter? - Would this request work against a different agency? It should not.

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

2

Pressure-test it

Makes the AI switch hats and attack its own answer.

A denial costs the agency nothing and a real search costs it days of staff time, so work through this letter as the agency records officer deciding whether it is worth running. Which category makes you reach for "unduly burdensome"? Which one is vague enough that you can honestly say you do not know what is being asked for? What fee estimate would you send back to make this go away? Then rewrite the two categories that fail, and tell me the one sentence in the letter that made you decide to actually run the search.
3

Go deeper

Pushes the work further once the basics are right.

Assume the answer comes back as a denial rather than records. Draft the two follow-ups this request will need: a reply to a "your request is overbroad or not reasonably described" letter that narrows Category 2 while holding Category 1 intact, and the skeleton of an administrative appeal for a blanket withholding, arguing segregability, demanding an itemized log with the exemption asserted per record, and preserving the arguments I will need if this ends up in court.

Before you run it

What to gather first

  • Which act governs: federal FOIA or a specific state public records act
  • The agency and, if you can, the component or division that holds the records
  • Names, titles, permit or case numbers, addresses, and meeting dates you already have
  • A defensible date range and the event that bounds it
  • Whether the records are wanted for news, research, commercial use, or a client matter

Watch for

  • State public records acts differ from federal FOIA and from each other in name, citation, response time, fee rules, exemptions, and appeal route, and they are amended regularly. Verify every one of those against the current act before sending. Do not accept a citation or deadline from the model.
  • Fee waivers and requester categories are federal FOIA constructs. Many state acts allocate costs differently, and a waiver argument written for FOIA can read as confused to a state records officer.
  • The request itself is frequently a public record, and agencies often notify the third party whose records are sought. Assume your target learns you asked, and file under the right name.
  • Using a records request in place of discovery in pending litigation can be limited by statute, treated differently by the agency, and used against you. Check before filing one on a matter already in suit.
  • A request narrowed to what you already know will return only what you already know. Keep one category aimed at the records you cannot name yet, described by custodian and system rather than by subject.

What comes back

A send-ready request letter: addressee and component, the governing act named from the inputs only, tiered Category 1/2/3 requests each with custodian, record type, system, date range, and proposed search terms, then the four pre-emptive paragraphs (conferral, segregability and withholding log, description of the search, preservation), fees with a dollar ceiling, native format with metadata, and a contact line. Followed by a narrowing plan and the four closing sections.

See an example of what you’ll get
Texas Public Information Act Request To: Public Information Coordinator, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Office of Compliance and Enforcement, Region 12 (Houston) This is a request under the Texas Public Information Act for the records described below. Records may be produced on a rolling basis in the order of the categories, and I will narrow any category on request rather than have it denied as burdensome. Category 1: the records I need. 1. The complete investigation file for Investigation No. 1789432, Gulfstream Polymers (RN102847119), including the investigator's field notes, photographs, sampling data, and any draft or unissued notice of violation. 2. Emails and text messages of Marisol Delgado and Trent Whitaker, February 1 through August 31, 2025, containing any of: "Gulfstream," "RN102847119," "1789432," "flare," "Baytown," "NOV," or "48812." 3. All correspondence between any TCEQ employee and any person at gulfstreampoly.com, same period, on the same terms. Category 2: helpful. 4. Any enforcement screening, referral, or docket entry evaluating this event, including records showing a decision not to escalate, and any supervisory approval of that decision. 5. Calendar entries for Delgado and Whitaker referencing Gulfstream or the Baytown facility in the same period. Category 3: nice to have. 6. Region 12 enforcement guidance or screening criteria in effect during the period for flare and emission-event investigations. If any category is unclear or burdensome, please call me before denying it. I will narrow the date range or the custodian list the same day. Withholding. If any record is withheld in whole or part, please produce all segregable non-exempt portions and provide an itemized list identifying each withheld record by date, author, recipient, and type, with the specific exception asserted for each. A category-level assertion covering the whole file is not sufficient for me to evaluate it. If the response is that no responsive records exist, please describe the search performed: which custodians, which systems, and which search terms. Preservation. Please preserve all potentially responsive records, including text messages and records on personal devices used for agency business, pending completion of this request. Fees. I am an individual requester seeking these records in the public interest concerning the agency's enforcement of air permits at a facility adjacent to residential neighborhoods. Please advise before incurring charges over $75. I will accept electronic delivery in native format with metadata intact; no need to convert to PDF. Please direct questions to me at the number below. [UNVERIFIED - confirm the current TPIA response period and the correct officer for Region 12 before sending; I have not stated a deadline in this letter.] --- Narrowing plan. Concede Category 3 immediately if asked; it is context, not proof. Then trim item 5. Never concede item 2. The custodian emails are the request. If pushed on item 2, cut the term list to "Gulfstream," "1789432," and "NOV" and hold the date range. --- Assumptions I made. That Region 12 rather than Austin central files holds the investigation file [verify - call the coordinator]. That Delgado and Whitaker are the right custodians and still employed [verify]. That TCEQ refers to these as "investigations" rather than "complaints" or "incidents" internally; the wrong internal term narrows the search wrongly [verify]. Nothing assumed about TPIA deadlines, fees, or exceptions. Where this is weakest. Item 2. Text messages on personal devices are where agencies push back hardest, and the term list is broad enough that an officer could call it a manual review of thousands of messages. Item 6 is second: enforcement guidance is the kind of thing an agency will claim is deliberative in full. What only you can decide. How wide Category 1 goes. As drafted it is tight enough to be run in a week, but it will not capture emails from a supervisor you have not named or from the Austin enforcement division, and you will not learn those names until you see the file. A wider version naming the division rather than two individuals gets more and probably triggers a cost estimate that stalls this a month. Also yours: whether to file in your name or the client's, since the request is itself a public record and the company will likely be notified. What would make this materially better. (1) A Region 12 org chart or the enforcement team roster: it fixes the custodian list, which is the weakest assumption here. (2) The agency's records retention schedule, which tells you whether the texts still exist. (3) Any prior TCEQ response letter, which shows how they describe their own systems.
Why this prompt is built the way it is
## Framework 1. **Route it right and cite only what you were given.** Name the component and its records officer; a misrouted request costs weeks before anyone searches. Federal FOIA and each state act differ in name, numbering, timing, fees, and appeal route, so never supply a citation from memory. 2. **Describe the search, not the question, and hand them the terms.** Custodian or office, record type, system, date range, subject, plus names, titles, permit and case numbers, addresses, email domains, meeting dates. "All documents relating to" is the burden objection writing itself. 3. **Tier it.** Category 1 is what you need, 2 is helpful, 3 is nice to have. Offer rolling production and further narrowing. This is the anti-burden device. 4. **Pre-empt the four denials, then fees and format.** Overbroad, not reasonably described, exempt in full, no responsive records. Each gets a paragraph, plus a preservation demand and an itemized withholding log. Close on requester category, any waiver argument, a dollar ceiling, and native format with metadata.