Give AI the Right Background Information

Choose the documents that govern the task and show how they fit together.

Rosa uploads everything she can find about the neighborhood lending cupboard: old flyers, meeting notes, a current policy, a draft proposal, and a message from a volunteer.

She asks, “Write the borrowing instructions.”

The answer offers a generous borrowing period and says no deposit is required. Unfortunately, it combines a rule from last year with a change that was proposed but never approved.

The assistant had plenty of information. It did not have a clear account of which information controlled the answer.

Useful background is selected and labeled. You want enough to support the job, organized so current rules, history, and unresolved questions are easy to distinguish.

Start with the decision the material must support

Rosa's task is narrow: write current borrowing instructions for members. She does not need a history of the cupboard, a list of donors, or private notes about individual borrowers.

The relevant material is whatever establishes eligibility, borrowing limits, return timing, deposits, and the next action.

Before uploading a file, ask two questions: Does this help answer the task? Is this information appropriate to share with the selected tool?

A focused excerpt may be enough. Remove personal records when the job only needs general rules. If an excerpt leaves out an exception that changes the answer, include that exception too.

Anthropic's context-engineering guidance discusses selecting and maintaining relevant information rather than simply accumulating more of it. This lesson applies that principle to a small document packet. Anthropic: Effective context engineering for AI agents.

Five documents, five different roles

Here is the complete fictional source set for the exercise. These are made-up organizational rules, not advice about real lending agreements.

The newest document is D. It is not the authority for current borrowing rules. Its status matters more than its timestamp.

Document E is current authority for collection arrangements. It does not replace the borrowing limits in B because it addresses a different part of the task.

Document C may deserve a follow-up question, but it cannot silently override the approved policy.

State the authority before asking for prose

Rosa writes:

Use B for current borrowing rules and E for collection arrangements. A is superseded. C is an unverified informal claim. D is an unapproved proposal. Do not combine proposed or historical terms with current instructions. Flag any conflict that the documents do not resolve.

This is a source hierarchy for a specific task. It is not a claim that formal documents are always right or emails are always wrong. An authorized amendment could arrive by email. You would need evidence that it actually changes the rule.

When authority is unclear, ask the owner. The assistant should not choose whichever source produces the smoothest answer.

Build a compact context packet

A context packet is simply the working information bundled for a task. It can fit on one page:

Goal: Draft current borrowing instructions for members of the fictional lending cupboard.

Current authority: Policy B, approved August 20 and effective September 1, 2026; operating notice E, approved September 2, 2026. Their supplied contents appear below.

Key facts: Up to two tools for seven days. One $10 refundable deposit per transaction. Collection and returns Saturday, 10 a.m.–noon. Contact the coordinator to arrange collection.

Excluded as current rules: A is superseded; C is unverified; D is an unapproved proposal.

Unknown: Coordinator contact details and any procedure for an exception to the standard arrangements were not supplied.

Output: A short member instruction sheet plus an internal list of missing information. Identify the source ID supporting each rule during review.

The packet should include the source contents or usable access to them. A list of filenames alone does not let an assistant read those files.

Keep the path back to the original

For a longer document, record the title, version or date, and the section or page supporting a rule. You can provide selected passages, but preserve the originals for checking.

Ask the assistant to show where important statements came from. A label such as “B” helps only if you can inspect B and find the matching rule.

If a tool searches a large collection, check that it retrieved the relevant passage and surrounding conditions. A search result can miss an exception elsewhere in the document.

Also distinguish a link from access. If the assistant cannot open the source, provide the necessary text or use an authorized way to supply it. Do not accept an invented summary of an unseen file.

Inspect the resulting instructions

An acceptable draft from the exercise sources could say:

Members may borrow up to two tools for seven days. A $10 refundable deposit applies to each borrowing transaction. Return tools within the seven-day borrowing period. Collection and returns take place on Saturdays from 10 a.m. to noon. Contact the coordinator to arrange collection.

For review, the assistant should connect the limits and deposit to B, and the opening times and collection action to E.

The internal note should say that coordinator contact details are missing. It should not invent a phone number, assume a return exception, or explain deposit deductions that the source never specifies.

A draft can be accurate yet need one more piece of information before distribution. Accuracy and readiness are related, but they are not identical.

Students: distinguish the assignment from examples and notes

A student's packet might contain the current assignment sheet, rubric, approved reading excerpts, personal notes, and an older example assignment.

Label their roles. The old example may illustrate structure while the current rubric controls requirements. Your notes may contain questions rather than established claims.

A useful request is:

Use the current assignment and rubric to identify requirements. Use my reading notes as leads that need checking against the supplied readings. Treat the older example as a structural illustration only. Flag conflicts instead of inventing the teacher's intention.

Include page references for evidence you may cite. Remove classmates' personal information and anything the course or institution does not permit you to upload.

Your exercise

Use all five fictional documents to build your own packet. Draft instructions once with the documents unlabeled and once with their roles made explicit. Compare both results against B and E.

Check five points: two-tool limit, seven-day period, $10 deposit per transaction, Saturday hours, and the coordinator action. Record any unsupported additions. Your actual outputs may differ; the comparison is an exercise, not a promised performance result.

For reuse, add an expiration rule: review the packet whenever the owner approves a policy change and before the next distribution. A saved packet can become stale even if it was accurate when created.

Completion check: Every operative fact points to the appropriate current source, and historical or proposed changes remain clearly separated.