Conceptual committee approval board with indigo reviewer tiles, amber and emerald gates, and a separate plum exception tile.

Example result illustrating this prompt's visual direction. Actual results may vary by model, reference image and settings.

Committee Quorum Routing from Decision Notes

Convert committee approval notes into a voting gate that distinguishes participation, approval thresholds, and veto rules.

Prompt

Transform the uploaded reference photo into a clean, readable approval-routing visual. The intended source is a legible photo of committee decision notes defining eligible reviewers, quorum, voting thresholds, abstentions, and veto rights. Use only legible information present in the photo or explicitly supplied alongside it. Preserve the source process meaning, role names, rule values, conditions, and relationships; replace the photographed paper or whiteboard presentation with a polished digital board. Do not reproduce desk clutter, handwriting defects, glare, or perspective distortion. Separate attendance or participation quorum from the number or proportion of affirmative approvals. Preserve the denominator used by each source rule and show how abstentions, recusals, missing responses, ties, and vetoes are handled only when documented. Do not treat a simple majority as unanimity or a participation quorum as approval. Keep any rule conflict unresolved in a Needs clarification card before the final decision. Represent committee roles rather than inventing members and distinguish a failed vote from a pending vote. Compose a committee board with reviewer tiles grouped above separate participation and decision gates, plus an isolated exception area. Use short English labels, high-contrast typography, orthogonal connectors, action cards for steps, and decision diamonds only for actual decisions. Use labels as well as color to distinguish states. Keep arrow direction unambiguous, avoid connector crossings, and fit the complete map inside the canvas without clipping. Include only labels needed to understand the workflow; do not add slogans, decorative captions, logos, or explanatory filler. For an unreadable or conflicting rule, preserve a visibly unresolved Needs clarification card at the affected point; never draw a falsely complete route beyond it. If the photo lacks enough legible content to identify the process, request a clearer source photo before creating the visual. Redact personal contact details, signatures, and account identifiers unless essential and explicitly requested; retain approver roles. Deliver one finished visual derived from the reference photo. This is a visual design for review: do not send notifications, grant approvals, change records, connect accounts, or claim an automation has been deployed.
Recommended: ChatGPT
Upload your photo to the AI tool first, then use this prompt. The prompt asks the model to preserve identity and key visual features.

How to use it

  1. Upload a legible photo of committee decision notes defining eligible reviewers, quorum, voting thresholds, abstentions, and veto rights.
  2. Paste the prompt and provide any confirmed rule clarifications alongside the photo.
  3. Check the finished visual against the source and resolve all Needs clarification cards before using it to configure an automation.

Common failure fixes

  • If participation quorum is used as the approval threshold, split the two rules and restore their original denominators.
  • If abstentions or recusals are counted by assumption, mark those cases Needs clarification.
  • If veto handling disappears into the majority route, restore the source-defined veto branch separately.