Your choice also saves this guide’s current worked-example checkmarks. Only this browser; no account or sync. View saved guides
Saving needs JavaScript. Reading and downloading this guide does not save it.
Make a start
One step at a time.
3 steps
Start with the synthetic worked example or other non-sensitive inputs. Run one prompt at a time in your chosen AI tool. Replace any bracketed placeholders with the requested material, check each reply, and supply the source or earlier outputs that step needs. Paste them again if the tool lacks that context.
Start with the synthetic example, then adapt each prompt to your task.
01
Open a chat and use the complete sample
A ticket is one support request; routing means choosing the team that should receive it. Open https://chatgpt.com. If you have access, choose New chat. Copy all the instructions below (the prompt), including the SAMPLE INPUT, into the message box and send it. You do not need to upload a file. You should see a five-row routing ledger with three assigned queues and two holds. The wording can differ from the worked example, but the facts and constraints must agree. If you cannot access this service, use another text assistant available to you; account requirements and limits may differ.
Your starting prompt
Route each ticket using only the explicit rules. Quote the words that justify the route. Keep multi-topic and insufficient-detail tickets on hold, and write a focused clarification for each hold. Use only the supplied facts; mark missing information rather than inventing it. Return written text only. Do not send, publish or change anything in another service.
SAMPLE INPUT
Made-up example for practice. All people, organizations, records and product behavior below are fictional.
Routing rules for fictional Beacon support: if the request is about changing invoice contact details, route to Account admin. If it reports a broken product function, route to Technical. If it asks how to use a working feature, route to How-to. If more than one rule matches or information is insufficient, Hold for clarification. Do not infer urgency. Tickets: T1 “Please change the invoice contact name.” T2 “Export shows an error after I click Download.” T3 “Where do I rename a project? Everything else works.” T4 “Need help with my account.” T5 “Please update the invoice contact and fix my export error.” Need one row per ticket, route, evidence and next clarification if held.
02
Compare, correct and save
Compare the answer with the complete sample input and the checks below. T1, T2 and T3 route to Account admin, Technical and How-to respectively. If a fact is missing, changed or invented, paste the correction prompt below into the same chat. Read the revised result again; if it still fails, correct the text yourself before using it. Copy the reviewed result into a new note or text document. Keep real publication, decisions and sending for a separate human review.
Your starting prompt
Check your previous answer against the SAMPLE INPUT in my first message. Test each point below. For a failure, show the problem and then return a complete corrected answer; for a missing source fact, keep it explicitly unknown. Do not invent a successful check.
- T1, T2 and T3 route to Account admin, Technical and How-to respectively.
- T4 and T5 remain on hold; T5 is not silently duplicated or assigned twice.
- All five ticket IDs appear once and no urgency is inferred.
03
Optional: use your own facts
Open a new chat. Copy the prompt below and replace [PASTE YOUR INPUT HERE] with your own non-sensitive source text, facts and limits for this task. Include any desired headings, count or length. Send the whole message. Expect the same kind of written result, using your facts. Check every source fact and limit yourself; the example’s names and totals do not apply. If a detail differs, show the exact mismatch and ask for a complete correction. Save the checked draft before any separate decision to use or send it.
Your starting prompt
Apply only my explicit routing rules below to every supplied ticket. Quote the words that justify each route. Keep multi-topic, conflicting or insufficient-detail cases on hold with a focused clarification question. Include each ticket once.
Use only my input. Ask for information needed to finish rather than guessing. Return written text only; do not send, publish, book, submit or change another service.
MY INPUT
[PASTE YOUR INPUT HERE]
Optional: improve the result
Test one rule change
See how a specified policy change alters only the relevant case. This extension uses the worked example. Return to that example chat, or paste its input and your checked example answer into a new chat first. Do not apply its sample values unchanged to your own input.
Advanced prompt
Hypothetical revised rule: multi-topic requests may be split into linked subrequests. Show how T5 would be represented under that rule with IDs T5a and T5b. Keep T4 on hold and do not claim any real tickets were changed. Keep the same SAMPLE INPUT from my first message unless I explicitly replace it.
Show, then try
See the shape of the result.
This input is synthetic. The output is a written illustration of the intended result, not a verified AI-tool run.
01 / The starting point
Synthetic input
Made-up example for practice. All people, organizations, records and product behavior below are fictional.
Routing rules for fictional Beacon support: if the request is about changing invoice contact details, route to Account admin. If it reports a broken product function, route to Technical. If it asks how to use a working feature, route to How-to. If more than one rule matches or information is insufficient, Hold for clarification. Do not infer urgency. Tickets: T1 “Please change the invoice contact name.” T2 “Export shows an error after I click Download.” T3 “Where do I rename a project? Everything else works.” T4 “Need help with my account.” T5 “Please update the invoice contact and fix my export error.” Need one row per ticket, route, evidence and next clarification if held.
Copies text only. For image or file tasks, use the source files named in the steps too.
Worked example written for this guide, not output recorded from a live AI session.
T1 | Account admin | “change the invoice contact name” | No clarification needed for routing.
T2 | Technical | “Export shows an error” | No clarification needed for routing.
T3 | How-to | “Where do I rename a project?” and “Everything else works” | No clarification needed for routing.
T4 | Hold for clarification | “help with my account” does not identify the task | What are you trying to change or do, and what happens?
T5 | Hold for clarification | “update the invoice contact” and “fix my export error” match two routes | Can these be recorded as two separate requests, one for contact details and one for the export error?
No urgency has been assigned.
These checks use the worked example and its particular facts. With your own material, check your actual names, numbers, sources and rules; do not reuse the sample’s values as the answer.
Unsaved checks stay in this tab and reset when you reload. If you choose Save guide, its current example checkmarks are kept in this browser when storage is available.
!
A few things to watch for.
Routing is not diagnosis or resolution. Do not imply the technical issue is understood.
A rule that says hold multi-topic requests must not be replaced with a guessed priority.