Reviewing an AI-generated document: a checklist before sharing
A well-presented text can contain an invented date, a decision that was never made or a name copied from another case. The risk increases when AI turns incomplete notes into confident prose. Before sharing, separate presentation, facts and decisions: fluent writing is not verification.
Here is a fictional scenario. Meeting notes say “quotation to review”, “training on Tuesday?” and “Amira checks the room”. An automated draft might say: “The quotation was approved; the training will take place on Tuesday; Amira has booked the room.” None of these three certainties appears in the notes. A cautious version states that the quotation is under review, the date remains to be confirmed and Amira needs to check the room’s availability.
Six checks before sharing
Source. Does every fact come from the notes or a verified reference? If not, cite the source or remove the statement.
Uncertainty. Are unconfirmed decisions, dates and owners flagged? Add “to be confirmed” and identify the person to ask.
Audience. Do the level of detail and tone suit the reader? Remove jargon and add essential context.
Confidentiality. Is personal or internal information exposed? Remove it, anonymise it or use a tool approved by your organisation.
Action. Does the reader know what to do next? Add the expected next step without inventing a deadline.
Accessibility. Are headings, links, tables and formatting readable on mobile and usable with a keyboard? Correct the structure, then try the file on the device that will actually be used.
A repeatable review sequence
Start with the facts. Read the document line by line alongside the notes. Mark each statement as established, inferred or unknown. An inference may help you formulate a question; it must not become a published decision. Then consider the reader: does the title describe the content? Are paragraphs short? Do links lead to the right resource? Finish with the requested action. Do not confuse “ready for review” with “approved for sharing”.
You can ask AI to identify inconsistencies without asking it to make the judgement alone: “Compare this draft with the supplied notes. Classify each statement as established, inferred or absent from the notes. Quote the corresponding passage. If evidence is missing, suggest a question to ask rather than an answer. Do not give an overall score.” Then check each classification yourself. Do not send sensitive data to an unauthorised tool.
The European guidelines on AI in education encourage examination of benefits and risks in practice. The same caution applies to a professional document.
For an initial framework, the DocPilotIA free pack of 25 prompts provides wording to adapt and review. Complement this checklist with our method for checking ChatGPT’s answers and our article on turning notes into professional documents. Always check each resource’s address before sharing it.
