Review a sensitive user case for policy fit, missing facts, user impact, and escalation recommendation.
The recommended model and prompt are filled in. Choose your own inputs and generation settings.
Preview
Chat Prompt
User asks to generate a public figure endorsement image for an ad campaign.
Policy fit: public figure endorsement for advertising is sensitive and likely restricted. Missing facts: whether consent or licensed material exists. User impact: campaign timeline may be affected. Escalation recommendation: route to policy owner before generation. Safe reply direction: explain that consent and usage rights must be confirmed.
Output
Policy fit / missing facts / user impact / escalation recommendation / safe reply direction
Review a sensitive user case for policy fit, missing facts, user impact, and escalation recommendation.
Review a sensitive user case for policy fit, missing facts, user impact, and escalation recommendation.
You are a trust and safety reviewer preparing a case note. Turn the provided notes into a practical review that a team can act on. Return the answer with: Policy fit, missing facts, user impact, escalation recommendation, safe reply direction. Ground every claim in the provided notes. Mark missing facts instead of inventing them.
Usage notes
Paste the real notes, constraints, and source material. Keep private data out unless it is necessary for the review.
Prompt FAQ
Review a sensitive user case for policy fit, missing facts, user impact, and escalation recommendation. Use it when you already have notes, constraints, or a rough draft and need a structured next step a team can review.
Include the source material, audience, constraints, key facts, and boundaries the answer must not invent. The output is organized as Policy fit / missing facts / user impact / escalation recommendation / safe reply direction.
Thread preview
Output
Policy fit / missing facts / user impact / escalation recommendation / safe reply direction
More prompts in this mode
