Knowledge Systems

Identify AI Data-Readiness Gaps

Turn supplied data-source, quality, access, privacy, security, and ownership evidence into an actionable readiness-gap register.

Quick facts

Best for
Owners · Founder-operators
Prompt type
Quality
Expected result
A source-grounded readiness-gap register with data requirement mapping, formulas and ranges, assumptions, uncertainty and confidence scores, explicit privacy, security, and data-access dependencies, Unknowns, stop conditions, and named-human approvals.
Time saved
Varies by source count and evidence quality
Required inputs
CANDIDATE USE CASES · DATA SOURCES · DATA QUALITY EVIDENCE · DATA ACCESS AND PERMISSIONS · PRIVACY AND SECURITY REQUIREMENTS · CONSTRAINTS · DATA OWNERS · DEPENDENCIES · SUCCESS MEASURES
Works with
ChatGPT + Claude

What this prompt does

  • Maps candidate-use-case needs to supplied sources, quality evidence, permissions, controls, owners, and dependencies.
  • Keeps unsupported readiness claims Unknown and proposes bounded evidence-gathering work for human review.

When to use

  • Before AI prototyping or procurement when the team needs to know whether required data is usable, authorized, controlled, and owned.

When not to use

  • Do not use it to grant access, change permissions, move or delete data, buy a system, deploy a model, or modify a live workflow.
  • Do not place unauthorized company data or unnecessary personal, sensitive, or confidential data in an AI system.

The prompt

#CONTEXT:
Create a readiness-gap register for the data needed by the supplied AI use cases. Assess documented evidence only; do not inspect, move, transform, or change live data or access.

#INPUTS:
- Candidate use cases with required inputs, outputs, and decision boundaries: [CANDIDATE USE CASES]
- Documented data sources, locations, formats, lineage, and refresh patterns: [DATA SOURCES]
- Supplied completeness, accuracy, consistency, timeliness, representativeness, and test evidence: [DATA QUALITY EVIDENCE]
- Current access rights, permission records, approved purposes, and access owners: [DATA ACCESS AND PERMISSIONS]
- Applicable privacy, security, classification, retention, and residency requirements: [PRIVACY AND SECURITY REQUIREMENTS]
- Budget, timing, capacity, technical, policy, and regulatory constraints: [CONSTRAINTS]
- Named data owners, stewards, and documented decision rights: [DATA OWNERS]
- Technical, governance, vendor, process, and people dependencies: [DEPENDENCIES]
- Supplied readiness and validation measures, thresholds, and measurement owners: [SUCCESS MEASURES]

#INSTRUCTIONS:
1. For each use case, map every required data element to its supplied source, owner, lineage, quality evidence, access status, approved purpose, privacy classification, security control, retention rule, and dependency.
2. Label missing, conflicting, expired, inaccessible, unmeasured, or unauthorized facts Unknown. Do not treat source existence as proof of quality, permission, suitability, or feasibility.
3. Create a readiness-gap register. Classify each gap as availability, quality, lineage, access, privacy, security, governance, ownership, integration, measurement, or dependency.
4. Give the evidence or source basis, consequence, named decision owner, proposed bounded evidence-gathering step, stop condition, and completion evidence for each gap.
5. Distinguish every value as Supplied, Calculated, or Estimated. For a Calculated value, show the formula, units, and supplied operands. For an Estimated value, show a range, assumptions, uncertainty, and confidence score with rationale.
6. Do not invent, infer, or fabricate ROI or return on investment, time savings, cost, feasibility, data quality, access, permission, consent, owner, lineage, control effectiveness, volume, coverage, or technical capability. Unsupported conclusions remain Unknown.
7. If readiness percentages are requested, use a documented formula such as verified requirements met ÷ total documented requirements × 100. Show counts, inclusion rules, range, assumptions, uncertainty, and confidence score; never imply that a score authorizes use.
8. Make privacy, security, and data-access dependencies explicit. Treat unresolved authorization, purpose limitation, sensitive-data handling, retention, or vendor-control questions as stop conditions.
9. Do not infer authorization from source availability, existing credentials, ownership, or a readiness recommendation. Do not automate, purchase, deploy, alter data or permissions, or change a live workflow.
10. A named human owner must approve prioritization adoption before action. A named human owner must approve purchasing before action. A named human owner must approve deployment before action. A named human owner must approve every data or permission change before action. A named human owner must approve every live workflow change before action.
11. Use only authorized company data in an approved AI workspace or approved AI vendor. Minimize the data; redact or omit unnecessary personal, sensitive, or confidential data. Follow company retention and vendor policy.

#RESPONSE FORMAT:
## Data requirement and evidence map
| Use case | Data requirement | State: Supplied, Calculated, Estimated, or Unknown | Source | Owner | Access | Quality evidence | Privacy and security dependency |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

## Readiness-gap register
| Gap | Type | Evidence or source basis | Consequence | Named owner | Bounded next step | Stop condition | Completion evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

## Calculations and estimates
| Measure | Formula | Supplied operands | Estimated range | Assumptions | Uncertainty | Confidence score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

## Privacy, security, and data-access dependencies

## Unknowns and human approvals

Input checklist

  • CANDIDATE USE CASES
  • DATA SOURCES
  • DATA QUALITY EVIDENCE
  • DATA ACCESS AND PERMISSIONS
  • PRIVACY AND SECURITY REQUIREMENTS
  • CONSTRAINTS
  • DATA OWNERS
  • DEPENDENCIES
  • SUCCESS MEASURES

Example input

Fictional example — CANDIDATE USE CASES: Detect missing intake fields and draft an internal case summary. DATA SOURCES: Northstar CRM records and service catalog; lineage for two custom fields Unknown. DATA QUALITY EVIDENCE: 100-record sample shows 82 complete location fields; sampling method documented. DATA ACCESS AND PERMISSIONS: De-identified export approved for assessment; production write access not approved. PRIVACY AND SECURITY REQUIREMENTS: Customer identifiers restricted; 30-day assessment retention. CONSTRAINTS: No new integration during assessment. DATA OWNERS: Maya owns CRM process; field-definition owner Unknown; Omar owns security. DEPENDENCIES: Data dictionary and vendor security review. SUCCESS MEASURES: Verified field mapping and approved test dataset; thresholds pending.

Expected output structure

  • A source-grounded readiness-gap register with data requirement mapping, formulas and ranges, assumptions, uncertainty and confidence scores, explicit privacy, security, and data-access dependencies, Unknowns, stop conditions, and named-human approvals.

Customize this prompt

  • Assess one bounded use case at a time so a strong source for one purpose is not treated as ready for every purpose.
  • Record the date and method behind each quality measure; labels without evidence stay Unknown.

Guardrails

  • Preserve the evidence or source basis for every material claim; unsupported facts remain Unknown.
  • Distinguish Supplied, Calculated, and Estimated values; show every formula, estimated range, assumption, uncertainty, and confidence score.
  • Do not invent, infer, or fabricate ROI or return on investment, time savings, cost, feasibility, data quality, access, permission, consent, owner, lineage, control effectiveness, coverage, or capability.
  • Make every privacy, security, and data-access dependency explicit and treat unresolved authorization as a stop condition.
  • A named human owner must approve prioritization adoption before action.
  • A named human owner must approve purchasing before action.
  • A named human owner must approve deployment before action.
  • A named human owner must approve every data or permission change before action.
  • A named human owner must approve every live workflow change before action.
  • A named human owner and the qualified professional must approve every legal, tax, employment, or regulatory interpretation before action.
  • A named human owner must approve every payment or financial decision before action.
  • A named human owner must approve every deletion, closure, suspension, termination, revocation, deactivation, or archive action before action.
  • A named human owner must approve every promise or commitment before action.
  • A named human owner must approve every policy exception before action.
  • A named human owner must approve every external send or publication before action.
  • Use only authorized company data in an approved AI workspace or approved AI vendor; minimize data, redact or omit unnecessary personal, sensitive, or confidential data, and follow company retention and vendor policy.
  • Do not infer authorization. Do not automate, purchase, deploy, change data or permissions, or mutate a live workflow.

Related articles

NEXT STEP

Next step

Find out what your company's knowledge is worth.