Session 1 taught the prompt. This session is what comes after it: identify a use case, give the tool the right sources, build it as a saved agent, refine it until it is right, and know what it takes to connect it to the systems you already run. We do all of it live in Copilot, ChatGPT, and Claude on a construction crew planner. Most of the room has Copilot at work; the other two are where the rest of the room already is. This page is the board for the session: the steps, the copy blocks, and the checks.
A repeating task, the documents it starts from, and where those documents live. If the tool cannot reach the source, the use case is not ready. That is the first filter, and it takes ten minutes.
An agent with your rules written in and your files attached, built in three rounds in front of the room. Then the two permissions on every connector, and the one question to ask IT.
Every tool has more than one model behind it, and the picker is usually one click from the chat box. Small models are fast and cheap and fine for most of the day. They also miss things a bigger model catches. Before we build anything, one question, asked up the ladder until it is answered correctly.
I need to wash my car. The car wash is 40 meters away. Should I walk or drive to get to the car wash?
Copilot, ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity: the windows are laid out the same way. The seven numbered areas below are where everything in this session lives. Hover or tap a number to see what that part does and what each tool calls it. The rest of the session is areas 1, 2, 4, and 6.
Each area explains what that part of the window does and what Copilot, ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Perplexity each call it.
The windows look almost identical. The differences are behind each area, and in which account you are signed into.
Call out the documents your day starts with: the look-ahead, the schedule, the GC's email, the pay app, the daily report, a text from the field. Every answer goes on the board. Then we sort them by source: email, calendar, storage, spreadsheet, project management, accounting and CRM, texts and phone. A use case is worth building when the task repeats and the tool can reach the source. The sort shows both.
Outlook or Gmail. The GC's schedule change, the RFI response, the short pay app notice. Most of the day starts here.
Crew starts, inspections, the OAC meeting, the weekly schedule meeting. Dates the tool can only know if it can see the calendar.
SharePoint, OneDrive, Google Drive, Egnyte. The look-ahead, the subcontract, the spec PDF, the roster. The biggest pile in the room.
The look-ahead in Excel. The schedule of values. The quantity tracker. Copilot sits inside Excel; ChatGPT reads the file you attach.
Procore, Autodesk Build, Bluebeam. The CO log, RFIs, submittals, daily reports. Where the job actually lives, and where the tool mostly cannot see yet.
Sage, Viewpoint, QuickBooks, HubSpot. Pay apps, job cost, who you bid to last year. Same story: a connector, or an export you attach.
The foreman's text at 6:12a. The verbal at the trailer. No tool reaches these. You paste it, or it never happened.
The sort answers the use-case question. Reachable source plus repeating task equals build it. Unreachable source equals paste it for now, and put it on the connector list for Section 06.
The same question in Copilot, ChatGPT, and Claude, with the context supplied three different ways. The question: "Which days next week are short on crew, and by how many? Show the math." The steps below are the checklist so nothing gets skipped.
First move: Work IQ on, ask "what did the GC send me this week about schedule changes." It should point at the email. Then turn Work IQ off and ask the same thing. It guesses about GCs in general. Same question, different context.
Name it after the job. Drop in the look-ahead, the roster, and the terms. Ask the crew question. Then ask a second question with no setup. The context is in the project now, not in your typing.
Identical moves, different vendor. Project knowledge holds the files, project instructions hold the standing rules. Show it for sixty seconds so the room sees the idea is not a ChatGPT feature. It is how every one of these tools works.
An agent is three things: the instructions, the files it reads, and where it stops. In Copilot it is an agent you create from the chat window. In ChatGPT it is a custom GPT. In Claude it is a skill, or a project with the instructions pinned. We build it in Copilot in three rounds, then paste the finished version into the other two. Round one is deliberately thin so the room can catch what it gets wrong. Every catch becomes one line in the instructions. The sample is a concrete crew's look-ahead; the method is the same for any trade.
Paste the email below into the planner and ask: "What breaks if we say yes?" A good answer names the crew shortage on 11/10, the equipment that is not booked and is already inside its booking window, and the material order deadline. It does not say yes or no. That stays with the PM.
From: GC scheduler, Building 3 To: Concrete PM Sent: Fri 11/06, 3:48p Subject: Panel pour 13-18 moving up Erector wants panels 13-18 cast earlier so they can start the north wall the week of 11/16. Can you cast panels 13-18 on Tue 11/10 instead of Thu 11/12? Forms would need to be done Monday. Everything else on the look-ahead stays. Let me know Monday morning.
Forms for 13-18 are already on the look-ahead for Monday 11/09, so the forming is not the problem. Finishers and the pump are.
pour_lookahead_and_roster.xlsx (two sheets), ready_mix_and_pump_terms.txt. All three in the downloads on the resources page. Attach them as the agent's knowledge, or put them in the project.
Copilot: create an agent from the chat window, paste the instructions, attach the files. ChatGPT: a custom GPT, same instructions, same files. Claude: a skill, or a project with the instructions pinned and the files in project knowledge. Same three parts every time. The Round 3 text on this page pastes into all three without a word changed.
It plans. It flags. It asks. It does not move a date, book equipment, or send anything. That line is in the instructions on purpose and it is the line you never delete.
A connector is how the tool reaches a system you run on: Outlook, SharePoint, Procore, your accounting system. Work IQ was one; you used it an hour ago. Every connector has two permissions, and the whole conversation with IT is about which one is on.
Outlook, Teams, SharePoint, the look-ahead on OneDrive. Same permissions you already have. If you cannot open the file, neither can it. Turn this on first. Watch it for two weeks.
Leave this off until you have watched it be right on your own files. One large Phoenix contractor runs its Microsoft connector read-only on purpose: it can read Outlook, it cannot draft into it. That is the setting most companies should start with.
That is the whole ask. Second question if you have the paid Copilot: "Do I have a Microsoft 365 Copilot license, or just Copilot chat?" Notebooks, Researcher, and agents need the paid one.
An assistant at that same contractor had full rights to an executive's mailbox and the tool still could not see it, because formal delegate access was not set. If it says it cannot find something you can see, the answer is usually permissions, not the prompt.
Copilot in Word and Outlook shows up only if IT turned it on. If you do not see it, that is a ticket, not a training problem.
Work IQ respects the confidentiality clause because it respects the file permissions. A personal ChatGPT account does not know the clause exists.
They exist or are coming, and the same two switches apply. Bring the question to a Session 3 if the association wants one: one task, connectors on, look only, in the room.
Research is for questions about the world, not about your files. Copilot calls it Researcher, ChatGPT calls it deep research, Claude calls it Research. All three need the paid plan. It reads for several minutes and comes back with sources. The output is not on this page on purpose. It comes from the sources on the day.
Context: I am the PM for a concrete subcontractor in Arizona. A GC superintendent verbally directed extra work and nothing is in writing yet. Our subcontract has a written-direction clause and a notice period. I need to know what the law and the standard subcontract forms say about preserving the claim. Role: Act as a construction attorney's paralegal who has pulled this research many times and knows the answer is only useful with the section cited. Task: Research and report 1) what written notice Arizona law expects a subcontractor to give to preserve a change order or delay claim, and any statutory deadlines 2) what the common subcontract forms (AIA, ConsensusDocs) say about notice 3) for every claim, the section or source, with a link I can open 4) what I should confirm against my own subcontract before relying on any of it 5) stop. Do not give me legal advice. Give me the pages to open.
Three moves when it is back: read the summary out loud, click one source and check the quoted section is there, ask the room whether it matches what they know. If someone disagrees, that is the best five minutes of the day.
Short add-on phrases you tack onto any prompt, in any of the tools. Each one changes what the model does behind the scenes. The research prompt above already uses three of them.
| What you add to the prompt | What AI does differently |
|---|---|
| "Show me your citations" | Forces AI to attach a source URL to every claim. If it can't, the gap becomes visible. |
| "Double-check your work" | AI re-evaluates its own answer. Often catches its own errors before you do. |
| "Think carefully" | Triggers longer, more deliberate reasoning. Better on multi-step questions. |
| "Show me only facts, no assumptions" | Reduces speculation. AI sticks to what it can document. |
| "If you can't find an authoritative source, say so" | Prevents fabrication. AI will admit when it doesn't know. |
| "Quote the exact passage" | No paraphrase. AI returns the actual words from the source. |
| "What's the date on this source?" | Currency check. Catches outdated info you'd miss otherwise. |
| "What are you uncertain about?" | AI flags its own confidence gaps. Tells you what to verify. |
| "What would I need to verify before acting?" | AI generates a verification checklist. Built-in safety net. |
| "Compare across multiple sources" | Triangulates instead of trusting one. Surfaces disagreements between sources. |
Stack two or three. "Show me your citations, double-check your work, and tell me what I should verify." Each phrase adds a layer of discipline. The combination does more than any one of them, and the lines belong in the Crew Planner's instructions as much as in a research prompt.
Back to the board in Section 03. Pick two answers. For each: which source is it in, can the tool reach that source today, what does it turn into, where does a person look before it goes out. Then we start a project on screen for one of them, with the owner's name stripped. Ten minutes, two people, one project.
| The idea | Microsoft 365 Copilot | ChatGPT | Claude |
|---|---|---|---|
| A folder with memory | Notebook | Project | Project |
| A saved way of working (a skill) | Agent, created from the chat window | Custom GPT | Skill, or project instructions |
| The model picker | Quick response or Think deeper | Model menu, top left | Model menu, under the chat box |
| A connector | Work IQ; Microsoft 365 built in | Connectors in settings | Connectors in settings |
| Research with sources | Researcher | Deep research | Research |
Product names as of the session date. The free Copilot chat does not include Notebooks, Researcher, or agents.
Click a question.
If you want help setting up the first one, bring the look-ahead, with the owner's name already stripped.
Everything from today, plus the sample files and the prompts, on one page built for this group.
polrai.com/partnerships/ccaz