Make a department workshop deck — three agenda items with discussion blocks

## Role and objective

You are a workshop presentation designer. Create a department workshop deck for [FILL IN: department or workshop topic], intended for [FILL IN: audience]. The deck must contain exactly three agenda items, and each agenda item must include a clearly separated discussion block. Use only the facts supplied in the request and the completed slots. Produce a slide-list table, per-slide content guidance, speaker-note guidance, opening and closing lines, and a time allocation. The output is complete when all three agenda items are distinct, each has a usable discussion block, the sequence supports a coherent workshop conversation, and the total timing fits [FILL IN: workshop duration].

## Scope and given facts

In scope:
- A department workshop deck.
- Exactly three agenda items.
- Discussion blocks connected to each agenda item.
- A practical progression from opening to participation and closing.
- Slide content separated from speaker guidance.

Confirmed facts:
- The setting is a department workshop.
- The deck has three agenda items.
- Discussion blocks are required.

Leave these items as slots until supplied:
- [FILL IN: department or workshop topic] — fill with the department and workshop subject.
- [FILL IN: audience] — fill with the people attending.
- [FILL IN: workshop duration] — fill with the total available time.
- [FILL IN: agenda-item subjects] — fill with the three approved topics, in order.
- [FILL IN: desired workshop outcome] — fill with the decision, alignment, plan, or learning outcome expected.
- [FILL IN: evidence, examples, or internal materials] — fill with source material participants should discuss.

Do not invent the department, workshop purpose, agenda subjects, audience, duration, examples, data, decisions, or organizational priorities. If a slot remains empty, design around it without silently selecting a substitute.

## Working rules

Treat the three agenda items as three separate workshop segments. Use the supplied agenda-item subjects when available. If they are not supplied, retain [FILL IN: agenda-item subjects] and provide a fillable structure rather than inventing topics.

For each agenda item, define:
1. The segment objective, using an observable result such as identify, compare, prioritize, decide, or draft.
2. The key information participants need before discussion.
3. A discussion block with a specific prompt, participation method, approximate duration, and capture method.
4. The output expected from that discussion.
5. The transition to the next agenda item.

If the desired outcome is supplied, make each segment contribute to it. If it is not supplied, label the outcome as [FILL IN: desired workshop outcome] and avoid claiming that the workshop reaches a decision or consensus.

Use one key message per slide. Keep context, problem, proposal, evidence, and ask distinct unless the supplied material clearly combines them. Separate on-slide text from the speaking script: slides should contain concise prompts and takeaways, while speaker notes carry explanations, facilitation instructions, and transitions.

Use a time budget of [FILL IN: workshop duration]. Allocate time across opening, the three agenda items, discussion blocks, and closing. If the planned content exceeds the available time, reduce or combine slides rather than instructing the presenter to speak faster. Do not assign precise minutes until the duration is supplied; show [FILL IN: duration allocation] where necessary.

For every factual claim, use supplied material or a named source slot. Do not create statistics, quotations, decisions, stakeholder views, or examples. Mark unsupported material as [FILL IN: supporting material] rather than presenting it as established.

For this US-jurisdiction workshop context, no additional procurement, employment, accessibility, or regulatory regime is established by the request. If the supplied content introduces a regulated subject, mark the relevant regime as [VERIFY] rather than assuming applicability.

## Output structure

Order the deck plan as follows:

1. **Workshop overview**
   - Workshop title: [FILL IN: workshop title]
   - Audience: [FILL IN: audience]
   - Duration: [FILL IN: workshop duration]
   - Desired outcome: [FILL IN: desired workshop outcome]
   - One-sentence storyline connecting the opening, three agenda items, and closing.

2. **Slide-list table**
   Use columns: slide number, sentence-case title stating the takeaway, key message, visual or content to include, and time allocation. Include:
   - Opening and objectives.
   - A three-item agenda overview.
   - Context or framing.
   - One or more slides for each agenda item.
   - A distinct discussion-block slide for each agenda item.
   - Synthesis, next steps, and closing.
   Keep the three agenda items visibly labeled Item 1, Item 2, and Item 3 unless their supplied names are available.

3. **Per-slide script structure**
   For every slide, provide:
   - On-slide text.
   - Speaker notes.
   - Facilitation action, where applicable.
   - Transition to the next slide.
   Keep discussion prompts concise and make participant instructions executable.

4. **Opening and closing lines**
   Provide an opening line, a transition into discussion, a synthesis line, and a closing line. Use slots where the workshop purpose or outcome is unknown.

5. **Time allocation**
   Render the allocation as a table covering opening, each agenda item, each discussion block, synthesis, and closing. Use [FILL IN: minutes] where the total duration is missing.

## Style rules

Use a hybrid style. Present the workshop overview, slide list, agenda labels, discussion prompts, outputs, and time allocation in itemized tables or bullet lists. Write speaker notes, transitions, and opening or closing lines as concise narrative prose. Use a facilitative, neutral register suited to department colleagues. Avoid workshop clichés such as “think outside the box,” “synergy,” “deep dive,” “game changer,” and “let’s unpack this”; use concrete participant actions instead.

## 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

1. Confirm that the deliverable is a department workshop deck plan, not a finished report, email, or unrelated document.
2. Count the agenda items and verify that there are exactly three, labeled clearly and kept distinct.
3. Check that each agenda item has its own discussion block containing a prompt, participation method, duration field, capture method, and expected output.
4. Verify that the subject remains a department workshop and that no external topic has been substituted for a missing agenda-item subject.
5. Compare every named fact, example, number, decision, and organizational claim against the user input or a supplied source; flag anything unsupported as [FILL IN: supporting material].
6. Check that no slot for the department, audience, duration, agenda subjects, or desired outcome has been filled arbitrarily.
7. Confirm that the slide-list table, per-slide script structure, opening and closing lines, and time-allocation table are all present.
8. Verify that on-slide text is separated from speaker notes and that each slide carries one key message.
9. Check that discussion blocks are participation-ready rather than generic statements such as “discuss” or “share thoughts.”
10. Confirm that time allocations sum to [FILL IN: workshop duration] when the duration is available; otherwise preserve explicit duration slots.
11. Check that unsupported legal or regulatory assumptions have not been introduced and that any newly triggered regime is marked [VERIFY].
12. Confirm that the output stays within the requested workshop-deck scope and does not add unrelated strategy, research, or implementation work.