IntellectraAIPractice exercise · 5 minutes to start · no account or email needed
Would You Send This?
Check an AI-written update against its source record and fix every statement the record does not support before it goes out.
What you will practice
Compare each statement in an AI-written draft with the source record, and correct status, dates, decisions, owners, and missing risks before you send it.
You asked an AI tool to turn your notes into an update. The draft reads well. Before it leaves your hands, you need to know whether it says what your record says.
Polished wording can quietly upgrade facts: planned work becomes finished, a requested date becomes a commitment, a discussion becomes an approval. Whoever drafted the update, the person who sends it is the one others will hold to it.
A quick example
Fictional note: “Parent workshop — 3 October proposed by the team. Room not booked yet.”
Before
“The parent workshop will take place on 3 October in the library.”
After
“We have proposed 3 October for the parent workshop. The room is not booked yet.”
The draft turned a proposal into a fixed date and invented a room. The revision is less certain because the facts are less certain.
Your turn — about 5 minutes
Fictional property: 18 Alder Lane. You gave an AI tool your property fact sheet and asked for a listing description.
Read the source record, then decide for each sentence in the draft whether it is ready as written or needs to change.
Your property fact sheet
Fictional property. Facts you supplied or verified.
- Bedrooms and baths: 3 bedrooms, 2 full baths (your walkthrough).
- Size: 1,640 sq ft on the county record. The seller says “about 1,800 with the sunroom.” The sunroom was added in 2019; permit status unknown.
- Roof: the seller says it was replaced in 2016. No receipt or permit provided yet.
- Kitchen: updated in 2021 with new counters and appliances (seller invoices seen).
- Lot: 0.21 acres (county record).
- Maple Park: about a ten-minute walk (you walked it).
- Schools: not verified. Assignment to be confirmed with the school district.
AI draft
Choose one answer for each statement. 0 of 7 answered.
General education only, not legal advice. Follow your brokerage’s advertising rules and your local disclosure requirements. The property is fictional.
Review rubric
Use these questions on your own work, not just on the exercise.
- Traceable
- Does every consequential statement point to a line in the record?
- Status
- Do status words (planned, in progress, complete) match the record exactly?
- Dates
- Is each date labeled as requested, proposed, or confirmed?
- Decisions
- Is every decision marked pending unless the record shows an approval?
- Owners
- Does every action have a named owner, or say “owner needed”?
- Risks
- Do the material risks and open questions from the record still appear?
- Audience
- Is anything included that the audience should not see or does not need?
Also check, for this kind of work
- Size, age, and condition claims come from documents, not estimates.
- Wording describes the property, not the people who should buy it.
- The description follows your brokerage’s advertising review before publishing.
Go deeper — 20–30 minutes with your own work
- Pick an update you would normally write this week: a status note, summary, listing, or message.
- Before you open any AI tool, gather the record you would check it against. If the record is scattered, that is a finding worth writing down.
- Draft the update with an AI tool your organization approves, using only information you are allowed to put in it. If you have no approved tool, review a past update you wrote yourself.
- Mark every statement Ready or Change, then check the draft against each rubric question above.
- Correct the draft and fill in the review card below, including how long the review took.
Stop or change the exercise if
- You cannot find an authoritative record to check against.
- Your organization’s rules do not allow the tool or the information.
- Reviewing takes longer than writing the update yourself. Record that too; it is a useful result.
Keep this: Pre-send review card
A one-screen record of what you checked, what you changed, and what the review cost.
What you type here stays in your browser and is lost when you leave the page. Keep real work details in the tools your organization approves.
Reflect
Which statement would have caused the most trouble if you had sent it unchanged, and what in the record told you?
Do it again
Run the review on your next real update, or try another case. When you are ready, “Helpful, but Unsupported” applies the same habit to answers checked against a policy.
- Helpful, but Unsupported — Map each claim in an AI assistant’s answer to a fixed policy, catch what the policy contradicts or never says, and write a corrected answer that still helps.
- One Mistake, One Checklist — Turn one concrete lesson from your work into a short checklist someone else could use, with a clear trigger, specific checks, the judgment it cannot replace, and its limits.
- Could Someone Continue This Tomorrow? — Write a handoff note that lets a colleague, or a fresh AI session, pick up the work without you: goal, state, sources, decisions, open questions, next actions, and what to leave out.
A personal next step
Which capability should you practice first?
The free 10-minute assessment helps you see which tasks AI may affect, where your professional judgment matters, and which capability to strengthen first. You get a personal report, a learning path, and a four-week Development Plan. It is an educational starting point, not a job prediction or a credential.
Map My Work