How to use Copilot effectively
The Oxford AI School
https://www.theoxfordaischool.com/blog/how-to-use-copilot-effectively

Use fictional information or information approved for the tool, account and purpose. Replace placeholders and check the result.

Prompt 1: turn a source into a decision brief
Use the selected reference [attach or select the actual current file] to prepare an update for [audience].

Focus on progress, blockers, decisions needed and unresolved questions. Keep it under 250 words. Identify the file and version you used and include available references for factual claims. Separate completed work from plans and suggestions.

If you cannot access the selected source, say so before drafting. Do not substitute web results or another similarly named file.

Check it: Open the reference. Check that the version and reporting period are the ones you intended. “Latest” is not always a sufficiently precise filename.

Prompt 2: reply without inventing a promise
Draft a reply to this selected email thread. The purpose is to [purpose].
Approved facts: [facts you are authorised to use].
What we can commit to: [specific commitments].
What is still unconfirmed: [gaps].

Answer the sender’s questions directly, use a warm but concise tone and keep it under 150 words. Do not invent prices, dates, refunds or explanations. Put unanswered questions in a separate note for me, outside the email draft. Do not send the message.

Check it: Read the actual thread and check the recipient list yourself. Make sure internal notes have not slipped into the reply.

Prompt 3: draft a report around the decision
Using the selected approved reference file, draft a one-page report for [audience] on [topic].

Start with the decision required. Then give the relevant evidence, available options, trade-offs and questions to resolve. Preserve the source’s qualifications and uncertainty. Use short headings and British English.

Do not add figures, claims or conclusions that the source does not support. Mark missing information “[TO CONFIRM]”. Keep recommendations distinct from source facts and include available source references.

Check it: Check the recommendation separately from the facts. A document can be accurate in its quotations and still make a recommendation the evidence does not justify.

Prompt 4: explain the numbers and show the method
Use the selected table containing Region, Gross sales and Refunds. For this exercise, Net sales means Gross sales minus Refunds.

Propose a calculated Net sales column and a summary of net sales by region. Show the formulas or calculation method, the rows included and the overall total. Treat missing numeric values as questions to resolve, not automatically as zero.

Explain any assumptions. Do not change the source data or add forecasts. If you cannot inspect the selected table, stop and tell me.

Check it: For the three fictional rows above, check £1,100, £800 and £450 before checking the regional totals. Also check whether filters or omitted rows have changed what was analysed.

Prompt 5: extract actions from the meeting evidence
Use the available transcript and relevant chat for this selected meeting. State which sources are available before summarising.

Create separate lists for decisions, agreed actions, proposals and open questions. For each action, show owner, deadline and an available transcript reference or supporting quotation. Write “not assigned” or “not agreed” where appropriate.

Keep tentative language tentative. Do not infer agreement from silence. If the transcript is unavailable, explain what can and cannot be established from the remaining material.

Check it: Ask the people responsible to confirm unclear actions. A transcript can mishear names or miss context; the neat table is not the meeting’s final authority.

Prompt 6: build the presentation around one decision
Using this selected approved source, propose a six-slide outline for [audience]. The decision is [decision]. The presentation lasts [time].

For each slide, give a message-led title, one main point, the evidence supporting it and a suggested visual only where useful. Preserve the source figures and qualifications. Mark gaps instead of inventing data.

Show me the outline for review before creating slides. If you cannot access the source or create slides in this app, say what you can provide instead.

Check it: Can someone understand the argument from the six titles? If not, fix that before choosing colours.

Prompt 7: diagnose the answer before rewriting it
The previous answer did not meet the brief.
The task was: [task].
The intended source was: [actual selected file, thread or meeting].
The problem was: [specific error].

First state which sources you actually used and which are unavailable. Explain whether the problem appears to be source access, conflicting information or the instructions. Do not invent an explanation if you cannot tell.

Then suggest the smallest change needed to produce a checkable answer. Wait for me to confirm before redrafting.

Check it: If access is missing, fix the account or source selection. Rewriting the same prompt five times will not open a file the tool cannot reach.