PromptSharp Daily — Sat, Jul 11, 2026

Issue #058 · Today: one AI workflow to steal, one prompt to run, one skill to level up — 5 minutes to get better at AI at work. — PromptSharp Daily

Issue #058 · Sat, Jul 11, 2026

The AI news that actually matters — in 5 minutes a day.

You don't need to be an AI engineer to get ahead with AI — you need to actually use it well at work. Every issue: one workflow to steal, one prompt to run, and one skill to level up. Read and try them in 5 minutes and you'll be better at AI than most of your colleagues. (Plus a quick scan of what's moving in AI, and a podcast worth watching.)

▸ USE AI TODAY · a workflow to steal

Make a messy decision with a 60-second AI matrix

List your options and what matters, then: 'Build a weighted decision matrix, score each option, show the math, and name the risk of the top pick.'

1.

List options + your criteria.

2.

Ask for a weighted, scored matrix.

3.

Sanity-check the weights — the thinking is yours.

Why it works: For any 'which do we choose' question, this replaces a vague gut call with a defensible, shareable framework you can put in a deck.

⌘ TODAY'S PROMPT · copy & paste  ·  From PromptSharp Law

Research memo skeleton: IRAC draft with a cite-verification table

You need a first-draft research memo on a discrete question tonight. Build the skeleton and the authority map — with a built-in cite-check discipline so no hallucinated case ever reaches a brief.

You are a senior research attorney drafting an INTERNAL first-draft memo for a licensed lawyer's review — this is a drafting aid, not legal advice. I will describe the legal question, jurisdiction, and posture.

Produce:

A) QUESTION PRESENTED — one sentence, jurisdiction-specific.

B) MEMO SKELETON — IRAC structure: issue, governing rule (statute / elements / standard of review), application section built on the fact hooks I gave you, the strongest counterargument, and a conclusion labeled with a confidence level (settled / split / open question).

C) AUTHORITY MAP — a table of every authority you relied on: authority, the proposition it supports, and a VERIFICATION STATUS column preset to "UNVERIFIED — check on Westlaw/Lexis before any use." Do not invent cases, holdings, quotations, or pin cites; if you are not certain an authority exists, write "RESEARCH NEEDED: [describe what to search]" instead of naming one.

D) OPEN QUESTIONS — what the human researcher must confirm: circuit splits, recent amendments, unpublished decisions, local rules.

Inputs: [LEGAL QUESTION] · [JURISDICTION + COURT] · [KEY FACTS — ANONYMIZED] · [CLIENT GOAL / POSTURE]

Rules: Anonymize before you paste — never include client names, privileged communications, or confidential client information in a consumer LLM (ABA Formal Op. 512: informed consent is required before client confidences enter a self-learning tool; use fictional party labels like ACME Corp). Do not invent authority — courts have sanctioned lawyers for AI-fabricated citations. Verify every citation and quotation against Westlaw, Lexis, or the official reporter before it leaves your desk.

Why: The failure mode that has actually gotten lawyers sanctioned is fabricated citations — so the prompt makes hallucination structurally impossible to miss: every authority lands in a verification table preset to UNVERIFIED, and uncertainty must surface as "RESEARCH NEEDED" instead of a plausible fake case name. The lawyer gets the 80% skeleton in minutes and keeps the 20% that requires a license.

✦ GET BETTER AT AI

Show, don't just tell. Paste one example of what 'good' looks like — a past email, a report you liked — and say 'match this style.' One example beats a paragraph of instructions.

◦ Worth knowing in AI · 5 moves in full

#1 · EVERY OPERATOR

Apple sues OpenAI, EU flags Meta’s “addictive design”

On its own it's a signal, not a to-do — but the operators who track these compound a real edge over peers who tune AI out until it's forced on them.