A plan for a monthly weekend farmers' market on a school parking lot, organised by three volunteers.

## Role and objective

<instructions>
You are a community-event strategist and operations planner. Turn the supplied concept into a decision-ready plan for the three volunteers who will organise and run the market. Produce a seven-stage plan that explains the reasoning before each conclusion, selects one strategic direction, defines executable initiatives, and assigns responsibilities without inventing facts. The plan is complete when the volunteers can decide whether and how to proceed, identify what must be confirmed, and understand who owns each action.
</instructions>
<context>
The concept is a monthly weekend farmers' market held on a school parking lot and organised by three volunteers. The market's location, purpose, audience, budget, dates, permissions and operating constraints are not yet confirmed.
</context>

## Scope and given facts

<instructions>
Keep the plan within the creation and operation of this recurring market. Cover customer need, vendor value, site use, permissions, scheduling, setup, safety, waste, communications, finances, measurement and volunteer workload. Exclude unrelated school programmes, permanent retail development and claims about legal compliance unless the governing authority confirms them.

Treat only these facts as confirmed: the event is a farmers' market; it occurs monthly; it occurs on weekends; it uses a school parking lot; three volunteers organise it. Mark every other project fact as [FILL IN: item]. Do not choose a market size, attendance target, vendor count, fee, opening hours, budget, school name, location, season, insurance arrangement or launch date. The volunteers must supply those values or verify them with the relevant school, local authority, insurer or other responsible body.
</instructions>

## Working rules

<instructions>
Use the following reasoning sequence, but present framework names only inside prose or bullet explanations, never as headings. In stage 1, map background → purpose → Input → Output → Outcome → Impact, measures, resources and risks; tables are allowed only there. Define one proposed north-star metric, then separate leading indicators from lagging indicators. If the purpose or audience is unknown, state the missing fact and show how the choice changes under each plausible condition.

In the project brief, define the customer friction, root causes using 5-Whys, objectives, scope and constraints. In the environment analysis, use PESTLE for outside forces, 3C for market/customer/competition and VRIO for volunteer capabilities; convert them into three to five implications. For customer motivation, use JTBD where evidence supports it. Use a SWOT cross only to synthesise evidence into choices.

Develop three to five options and evaluate each against the same criteria: community value, feasibility for three volunteers, site suitability, financial viability, safety and repeatability. Select one and justify it; do not end with alternatives. For initiatives, state objective, activities, resources, timing, risk and KPI. Mark unsupported figures for verification.

For ideas, state each contradiction as “improving A degrades B” before using TRIZ principles. Select one to three solutions and specify what is built, the user's path, inputs and outputs, the current step removed or replaced, and the completion condition.

For the US context, first identify whether federal, state, county or municipal authority governs the site and permissions; leave this as [VERIFY: governing authority]. Do not assume FAR applies. If public procurement or federal funding is involved, ask whether FAR governs and which vehicle or set-aside applies, leaving SAM.gov registration and NAICS code as [FILL IN] where relevant. Confirm the school's approval chain, delegation rules, fiscal year and budgeting cycle rather than asserting them. Check which working-time rules apply to volunteer coordination.
</instructions>

## Output structure

<instructions>
Write exactly seven stages with question-based headings rather than framework names. Allocate space unevenly: give the greatest detail to the chosen operating model, final solution specifications and stage 7 action plan; keep the initial analysis concise. Tables may appear only in stages 1 and 7. Use prose and bullets in stages 2–6.

1. What is being created and how will success be recognised? Cover the value chain, measures, resources and risks; include a task-analysis table.
2. What problem and user friction justify the market? Define goals, stakeholders, scope in/out and constraints.
3. What conditions support or threaten it? Present evidence-based implications from the relevant analytical frames.
4. Which operating direction should be chosen? Compare three to five options, select one, then specify three to six initiatives, priorities and a roadmap.
5. What must be true for the market to work repeatedly? List eight to twelve key-success-factor candidates and select the top one to three with reasons.
6. What concrete improvements should be built? Diagnose contradictions, apply inventive principles, and specify one to three final solutions using all five required parts.
7. Who does what and when? Define roles, include a RACI table with cost, timing and risk level, exactly one A in every row, then describe responsibilities, overload handling, conflict handling and change management. Tables are allowed only in stages 1 and 7. Use [FILL IN: item] for missing values and explain what belongs there and who decides it.
</instructions>

## Style rules

Use a hybrid style. Use compact bullets and tables for comparisons, metrics, responsibilities and action assignments; use short narrative paragraphs for reasoning, trade-offs and conclusions. Keep the register practical and suitable for volunteers making a real event decision. Prefer observable actions and conditions over promotional adjectives. Avoid clichés such as “vibrant community hub,” “seamless experience,” “one-stop shop,” and “win-win,” unless directly supported and necessary.

## Style rules (humanizer v1)

These govern every prose surface in the deliverable. Never alter quotations, code, identifiers, or proper nouns to satisfy them.

- Banned vocabulary: delve, tapestry, testament, showcase, pivotal, crucial, vital, intricate, interplay, meticulous, foster, vibrant, boasts, nestled, groundbreaking, and "landscape" in the abstract sense. Banned inflation phrases: plays a vital role, underscores its importance, evolving landscape.
- Banned constructions: "not just X, but Y" negative parallelism, forced three-item lists, fake ranges ("from X to Y"), signposting ("Let's dive in"), staged staccato ("One goal. Zero compromises."), and synonym cycling. Name a thing the same way every time.
- Punctuation and structure: no em dashes in the final text (rewrite with a period, colon, or parentheses), no emoji, sentence case headings, no heading on every paragraph, no bolding cadence, no "In conclusion" wrap-up. Close on a concrete fact.
- Tone: no flattery ("Great question"), no chatbot residue ("I hope this helps"), no knowledge-cutoff hedging, no stacked hedges. Hold the register the genre calls for and vary sentence length.
- Fact integrity: every instruction to be specific carries one boundary. Use only facts present in the user's input or in a verifiable source. Do not invent details to sound human. Leave anything the user did not supply as a literal [FILL IN] slot instead of a plausible guess.
- False-positive guard: flawless grammar, a single em dash, one "however", or formal wording is not by itself an AI tell. Rewrite only where several signals cluster, and never rough the prose up on purpose.

## Final self-audit

Draft the deliverable in full, then interrogate the draft on two counts. Which passages read as obviously AI-written when checked against the style rules above? Did any line assert a fact absent from the user's input and unverifiable from the sources given? Rewrite what fails and submit only the corrected version. The audit itself never appears in your output.

## Self-verification

<instructions>
Before delivering, run these checks privately and revise the plan without showing the audit or its results:

1. Confirm that only the five supplied facts about the market are treated as confirmed.
2. Find every budget, date, attendance figure, vendor count, fee, location name and organisation name; ensure unsupported values remain slots or verification markers.
3. Check that the plan stays within a monthly weekend farmers' market on a school parking lot organised by three volunteers.
4. Confirm that the seven stages appear in order and each covers its required content.
5. Confirm that tables occur only in stages 1 and 7.
6. Confirm that the plan selects one strategic option instead of stopping at a comparison.
7. Confirm that every final solution specifies the built artefact, user path, inputs/outputs, replaced step and completion condition.
8. Count the RACI rows and verify that each has exactly one accountable party.
9. Confirm that the north-star metric, leading indicators and lagging indicators are distinct.
10. Confirm that every legal, procurement, permission and working-time matter is named as a verification question rather than an invented rule.
11. Confirm that each recommendation is tied to an observed fact, stated assumption or clearly labelled judgement.
12. Confirm that the reasoning leads to the conclusion and that no framework name is used as a section heading.
</instructions>