AI tools · module 16 of 100
Claude: from source to working document
Work with project knowledge, clear instructions, and a reusable result.
After this lesson
Using Claude, you create a verifiable document and understand the difference between chat, project knowledge, and an artifact.
In view · How it connects
Claude: source → working document
Choose allowed project knowledge and a defined assignment.
Develop a reusable document with recognisable components.
Check the content and who can view the result.
Part 1 of 3 · Source and instructions
Your preference for less movement is on. Choose each part yourself.
Start small with one practice source
Open Claude and start with a fictitious working instruction of half a page. First, ask which data is in the source and which is missing. Only then, ask to create a checklist. This allows you to check the source processing before getting a polished result. Do not use confidential customer data without appropriate permission and agreements.
Make the context reusable
For recurring work, you can use a project with its own instructions and relevant documents. For example, set the target audience, writing style, and the rule "do not invent missing facts" in the instructions. Do not assume that every individual chat automatically becomes available as project knowledge. Keep track yourself of which document and which version form the basis.
Refine an artifact with purpose
Claude can show an independent piece of work in a separate window, such as a checklist or a simple interactive explanation. This is called an artifact. Request only one targeted adjustment at a time and then re-check the facts. The form is not proof of quality. Publishing or sharing is a separate choice; check visibility and content first.
New practice example
From explanation to a usable result.
Use Claude with a clear source and a concrete working document as the end goal.
Fictional practice situationFictitious project note: an activity is planned for twelve participants. No budget has been agreed upon yet. You want an internal briefing document.
View a possible solution
This is how it can be done
Request three headings: confirmed arrangements, open questions, and proposed next steps. Put "budget not yet agreed" under the open questions. Label each proposed step as a proposal.
Why this works
Source facts and suggestions are not mixed up. The method also works when available project functions differ per account.
Make it slightly more difficult
Later, provide an adjusted note with ten participants. Have it indicate which passages of the briefing must change.
Extra practice, at your own pace. You do not need to submit anything. This does not count towards an automatic assessment.
Your workplace · learning by doing
Make something. See what changes.
Checking the AI connection… You can already view the written example.
Present your assignment to Ende.
Read the answer, change one thing, and compare.
Previously held
New version
You remain in control
What do you want to improve in your next attempt?
On this device only. AI answers remain only in this page memory. This is self-review, not a grade.
Why this approach works
Source facts and suggestions are not mixed up. The method also works when available project functions differ per account.
A step further
Later, provide an adjusted note with ten participants. Have it indicate which passages of the briefing must change.
Try & discover · no obligation
Place source and concept side by side
Adjust the values in the concept. See what difference you would give back to the writer.
Fictitious arrangements for an online introduction. Compare the original arrangements with the values that might end up in a concept.
| Part | Source | Concept | Check |
|---|---|---|---|
| End time | 11:00 | 11:30 | Difference |
| Form | online | online | Same |
| Contact person | Noor | Unknown | Difference |
Targeted feedback you could provide
- End time: This value deviates from the source. Check whether the change was actually agreed upon. Ask to retain the source value "11:00", unless a change is confirmed.
- Contact person: Information from the source is now missing in the concept. Ask to retain the source value "Noor", unless a change is confirmed.
You are only changing three fixed fields of a fictitious concept. This is not a full document analysis or a check of a real upload.
This trial works locally with fictitious data and does not count towards your lesson completion. It starts anew with a new lesson or reload.
A prompt to get you started
Use only this fictitious instruction: "For a workshop of 60 minutes, the facilitator checks the screen and sound in advance. There are 8 participants. Afterwards, the facilitator collects three feedback points." First, create a list of facts and then an editable checklist. Do not add times or tasks that are not in the source. Mark missing information. Use an artifact if that is available in my environment.
Apply it
The source for your Claude checklist mentions 8 participants and a workshop of 60 minutes. The artifact mentions 10 participants and adds a start time without a source.
What do you ask when the document is shared?
- Correct to 8 participants and 60 minutes; mark the start time as missing and check again.
- Only make the design more beautiful.
- Retain the new details because Claude has created an artifact.
With JavaScript, you can check your approach and receive immediate feedback.
Test your insight
What is the best check before you share an artifact?
- Verifying whether the facts are correct and who will be able to see the result.
- Only looking at whether it looks nice.
- Assuming that every artifact automatically remains private.
Extra practice
Try the prompt in Claude. Then, ask to separate the checklist into before and after the workshop. Note two facts you checked and one missing piece of information. Do not share or publish the result yet.
I am checking that the checklist mentions 8 participants and 60 minutes. The preparation includes screen and sound; afterwards, three feedback points follow. A start time is missing and therefore remains open. I am asking for a clearer layout, without adding an invented schedule.
