Remove confidential details before sharing a document.
The useful part of a document may be perfectly shareable even when the names, deal terms or internal discussion are not. Have AI prepare a separate copy that preserves the point and removes the material this recipient should not receive—including details that are invisible on the page.
Try it now
Copy the prompt into your AI tool of choice, then answer its questions as they come.
Paste it into any AI chat to start. For most people, this is all you need.
Everything on this page in one paste: the prompt plus the full plan, every step and what to check. Use it for longer moves, to plan ahead, to share with a colleague, or if your AI can't open links.
How it goes
What the AI will do
- Establish what the recipient needs and which information must be removed, using the sharing request and relevant company rules.
- Create a separate redacted copy and inspect the actual exported file for visible and recoverable confidential material.
- Have a fresh reviewer check the exported copy where available, then repair any findings.
What to have ready
- The original document and the intended recipient or use; a rough description of the sharing situation is enough to begin.
- Available classification rules or sharing instructions; the AI searches relevant connected records before asking for missing material.
Where you come in
- Resolve any uncertainty about what this recipient may receive.
- Review whether the redacted document still conveys the intended meaning and any limits of the file checks.
What you'll get
A separate, checked sharing copy, with a short account of what was removed and any parts the available tools could not inspect.
You're done when
A separate sharing copy preserves the intended meaning and has passed the applicable visible-content and recoverable-content checks, with any unperformed inspection clearly identified. The original remains intact and the document has not been sent.
These are general instructions, not a description of this user's particular AI system, tools, access, or circumstances. Adapt the method to the user's goal and the capabilities you can actually use, while preserving the activity's essential sequence, review points, and intended result. ### Start with the activity and the user's context Read the complete activity and guide the user through it. Use the activity prompt yourself; the user does not need to paste it again. Keep the responsibilities of the user, the AI, and any colleague clear. Begin with what the user has already supplied. Establish the intended result and resolve missing context through focused questions when needed. Work within the activity's stated scope, permissions, required confirmations, and stopping points, including any deliberate order for introducing information. Make progress with the available information and reasonable, clearly identified assumptions where the activity allows them. ### Check the capabilities needed for this work Inspect relevant available tools, connectors, and data. Use small, relevant, non-destructive checks to establish whether necessary access or a capability actually works. Naming a product does not establish access to it. Let this activity determine what needs checking; do not impose a universal preliminary questionnaire or a full system audit. When useful access is missing: - Explain what you cannot reach and how that material would help. - Investigate practical setup, connection, export, or other access alternatives before asking the user to gather material or troubleshoot. - If progress depends on access, request only the specific user action or permission needed to enable it or provide the material another way. Continue useful independent work while awaiting the response. - Offer to walk the user through an export or upload. Welcome files, links, copied text, rough notes, or an interview as supported by your system and the activity, and use the best available route. If the missing access is optional, continue with what is available. ### Ask focused questions and respect the answers Ask questions only when necessary to complete the work well or satisfy the activity's required review points. Build on answers already supplied. Ask one question at a time, or a small group of closely related questions. Wait on work that depends on the answer, and continue useful work that does not. Explain unfamiliar language with examples where helpful. Confirm answers or decisions you supply on the user's behalf before treating them as the user's final answers or decisions. This does not require separate approval of every sourced finding; follow the activity's specific review requirements. ### Keep evidence and independent contributions distinct Distinguish evidence, inference, and missing information. Check your work against the source material. Use independent agents when your system actually supports delegation and independent investigation or review would improve the work: - Give each agent a bounded brief and the context appropriate to its role. - Keep discovery independent until synthesis where the activity requires it. Preserve any requirement for the user or colleagues to contribute before seeing other explanations. - Follow the activity's stated fallback and any required confirmation when independent agents or fresh contexts are unavailable. Preserve reviewer isolation where required; describe shared-context or sequential passes accurately. ### Produce, check, and revise the result Do the substantive investigation and production. Carry the activity through to the most complete, usable result within its scope, rather than ending with a plan or handing the main work back to the user. When missing information does not prevent useful work, proceed with clearly identified assumptions where the activity permits them. Check the result against the activity's completion criteria. At each substantive delivery, state what is complete and any material unfinished work, assumptions, helpful missing information, and remaining uncertainty. Explain how these affect what the user can use, and help the user revise the result. Preserve the activity's stopping point. Do not turn a rehearsal, investigation, or test-design activity into execution that the user has not authorized. Help me remove confidential details from a document while preserving what the intended recipient needs to understand. Create and inspect a separate sharing copy. Keep the original intact and do the substantive file work yourself. ### Establish the sharing boundary Read the supplied document and establish the intended recipient, purpose and useful output format. Inspect and try access to the sharing request, recipient correspondence, relevant project messages, company classification rules and any agreement governing disclosure to this recipient. Search the document or project name and recipient organization to find what was requested, what has already been agreed and which categories must stay internal. Keep the inquiry focused on this sharing decision. Identify the authoritative version, attachments and relevant restrictions. Distinguish an explicit restriction from your inference that a detail may be sensitive. A previous email containing information does not establish permission to disclose everything related to it. Ask one focused question when a consequential boundary is unresolved and wait on the affected content. If the records are unavailable, inspect permitted access or export options, then ask for the smallest useful instruction or source. Do not invent a company classification policy. Present the proposed treatment in plain language: what stays, what is removed or generalized, and what the recipient should still be able to understand. Use established user instructions without repeatedly asking for approval. Have me settle uncertain sharing choices before producing a final copy. ### Inspect the document beyond its visible pages Identify the actual file type and inspect the tools available for editing, redaction, conversion and verification. Consult the tool's current official instructions when its removal behavior is uncertain. Work on a copy. Read the whole accessible document, including relevant tables, charts, images, headers, footers, links and attachments. Look for the specified confidential information and indirect identifiers that would disclose the same thing: for example, removing a customer name may achieve little if an unusual deal description identifies them. Assess such cases against the agreed purpose instead of stripping all useful detail. Inspect comments, revision history or tracked changes retained in the file, hidden text, document properties, embedded objects and other recoverable content supported by the format. A black rectangle placed over text is not evidence that the underlying text has been removed. A fresh export may retain information too; check its actual behavior rather than assuming the conversion sanitizes it. If the environment cannot inspect or safely edit this format, investigate a supported redaction or clean reconstruction route. Explain any practical tradeoff in format, editability or fidelity and obtain my choice when it changes the useful result. Screenshots or a pasted extract cannot establish what remains in the original file's hidden structures. If necessary, produce a clean document from the permitted content and explicitly identify which original components could not be assessed. ### Produce the sharing copy Remove the agreed material using a method that removes it from the delivered artifact. Where useful, replace names with consistent neutral labels and mark substantive omissions so sentences, tables and references still make sense. Keep redaction labels distinct from original language. Do not silently alter commitments, numerical relationships or conclusions to make the document read smoothly. Inspect contextual clues and combinations of surviving details that could reveal what was meant to be removed. Check charts and images as well as searchable text. Preserve the document's useful structure and source meaning. Keep any private removal log separate from the sharing file; it must not travel inside comments, attachments or metadata. For a long or complex file, assign bounded sections to agents with the agreed removal rules, relevant context and exact completion criteria. Keep a page/component coverage record and reconcile consistent substitutions centrally. Use manageable passes when agents are unavailable. Do not expose original material to a new tool or service outside the permitted working environment merely to obtain another reviewer. ### Check the actual exported artifact Open the exact file intended for delivery. Inspect every page or meaningful component visually, extract its text where supported, search for removed names and distinctive fragments, and recheck comments, tracked changes, properties and embedded content that the format and available tools permit. Check whether copying or selecting a redacted region reveals underlying text. Compare the allowed content with the source to find accidental omissions or changes in meaning. Give a fresh reviewer the actual exported file, agreed sharing boundary and necessary original excerpts where available and permitted, without your explanation of why it is safe. Ask for surviving confidential details, indirect disclosures, recoverable content and damage to meaning. Repair findings and repeat the affected checks on the newly exported file. With no separate reviewer, perform a dedicated second pass and identify it honestly. If a material inspection cannot be performed, name it precisely and keep the result provisional for that check. Do not claim that a visual check proves all hidden data has been removed. ### Deliver the usable copy Provide the separate sharing file, identify its filename and format, and briefly explain the categories removed, checks actually performed and any remaining inspection limits. Keep any detailed private log clearly separate. Invite me to check that it still conveys what the recipient needs; make agreed corrections and recheck affected content. Stop before sending or publishing the document. These instructions were written in September 2026 using the frontier models available at the time. You may now have better tools or models, or restrictions that make some tasks harder. Your AI should adapt to the tools and access you actually have and find the best available way to help. Everything here is a starting suggestion for you and your AI, not a proven best practice for every setup. Feel free to rewrite any of it to better meet your needs.
View full AI instructions
Remove confidential details before sharing a document.
What the AI will do
- Establish what the recipient needs and which information must be removed, using the sharing request and relevant company rules.
- Create a separate redacted copy and inspect the actual exported file for visible and recoverable confidential material.
- Have a fresh reviewer check the exported copy where available, then repair any findings.
What you can provide
- The original document and the intended recipient or use; a rough description of the sharing situation is enough to begin.
- Available classification rules or sharing instructions; the AI searches relevant connected records before asking for missing material.
Where you'll take part
- Resolve any uncertainty about what this recipient may receive.
- Review whether the redacted document still conveys the intended meaning and any limits of the file checks.
What you'll get
A separate, checked sharing copy, with a short account of what was removed and any parts the available tools could not inspect.
Activity context
The useful part of a document may be perfectly shareable even when the names, deal terms or internal discussion are not. Have AI prepare a separate copy that preserves the point and removes the material this recipient should not receive—including details that are invisible on the page.
For the user
Give the AI the document and say who should receive it and why. It will investigate relevant sharing rules, ask about consequential ambiguities, and make a separate copy. You review the meaning and any inspection limits before sharing it; the AI does not send it as part of this activity.
Guidance for the AI
These are general instructions, not a description of this user's particular AI system, tools, access, or circumstances. Adapt the method to the user's goal and the capabilities you can actually use, while preserving the activity's essential sequence, review points, and intended result.
Start with the activity and the user's context
Read the complete activity and guide the user through it. Use the activity prompt yourself; the user does not need to paste it again. Keep the responsibilities of the user, the AI, and any colleague clear.
Begin with what the user has already supplied. Establish the intended result and resolve missing context through focused questions when needed. Work within the activity's stated scope, permissions, required confirmations, and stopping points, including any deliberate order for introducing information. Make progress with the available information and reasonable, clearly identified assumptions where the activity allows them.
Check the capabilities needed for this work
Inspect relevant available tools, connectors, and data. Use small, relevant, non-destructive checks to establish whether necessary access or a capability actually works. Naming a product does not establish access to it. Let this activity determine what needs checking; do not impose a universal preliminary questionnaire or a full system audit.
When useful access is missing:
- Explain what you cannot reach and how that material would help.
- Investigate practical setup, connection, export, or other access alternatives before asking the user to gather material or troubleshoot.
- If progress depends on access, request only the specific user action or permission needed to enable it or provide the material another way. Continue useful independent work while awaiting the response.
- Offer to walk the user through an export or upload. Welcome files, links, copied text, rough notes, or an interview as supported by your system and the activity, and use the best available route. If the missing access is optional, continue with what is available.
Ask focused questions and respect the answers
Ask questions only when necessary to complete the work well or satisfy the activity's required review points. Build on answers already supplied. Ask one question at a time, or a small group of closely related questions. Wait on work that depends on the answer, and continue useful work that does not. Explain unfamiliar language with examples where helpful.
Confirm answers or decisions you supply on the user's behalf before treating them as the user's final answers or decisions. This does not require separate approval of every sourced finding; follow the activity's specific review requirements.
Keep evidence and independent contributions distinct
Distinguish evidence, inference, and missing information. Check your work against the source material.
Use independent agents when your system actually supports delegation and independent investigation or review would improve the work:
- Give each agent a bounded brief and the context appropriate to its role.
- Keep discovery independent until synthesis where the activity requires it. Preserve any requirement for the user or colleagues to contribute before seeing other explanations.
- Follow the activity's stated fallback and any required confirmation when independent agents or fresh contexts are unavailable. Preserve reviewer isolation where required; describe shared-context or sequential passes accurately.
Produce, check, and revise the result
Do the substantive investigation and production. Carry the activity through to the most complete, usable result within its scope, rather than ending with a plan or handing the main work back to the user. When missing information does not prevent useful work, proceed with clearly identified assumptions where the activity permits them.
Check the result against the activity's completion criteria. At each substantive delivery, state what is complete and any material unfinished work, assumptions, helpful missing information, and remaining uncertainty. Explain how these affect what the user can use, and help the user revise the result.
Preserve the activity's stopping point. Do not turn a rehearsal, investigation, or test-design activity into execution that the user has not authorized.
Your AI prompt
Help me remove confidential details from a document while preserving what the intended recipient needs to understand. Create and inspect a separate sharing copy. Keep the original intact and do the substantive file work yourself.
Establish the sharing boundary
Read the supplied document and establish the intended recipient, purpose and useful output format. Inspect and try access to the sharing request, recipient correspondence, relevant project messages, company classification rules and any agreement governing disclosure to this recipient. Search the document or project name and recipient organization to find what was requested, what has already been agreed and which categories must stay internal. Keep the inquiry focused on this sharing decision.
Identify the authoritative version, attachments and relevant restrictions. Distinguish an explicit restriction from your inference that a detail may be sensitive. A previous email containing information does not establish permission to disclose everything related to it. Ask one focused question when a consequential boundary is unresolved and wait on the affected content. If the records are unavailable, inspect permitted access or export options, then ask for the smallest useful instruction or source. Do not invent a company classification policy.
Present the proposed treatment in plain language: what stays, what is removed or generalized, and what the recipient should still be able to understand. Use established user instructions without repeatedly asking for approval. Have me settle uncertain sharing choices before producing a final copy.
Inspect the document beyond its visible pages
Identify the actual file type and inspect the tools available for editing, redaction, conversion and verification. Consult the tool's current official instructions when its removal behavior is uncertain. Work on a copy.
Read the whole accessible document, including relevant tables, charts, images, headers, footers, links and attachments. Look for the specified confidential information and indirect identifiers that would disclose the same thing: for example, removing a customer name may achieve little if an unusual deal description identifies them. Assess such cases against the agreed purpose instead of stripping all useful detail.
Inspect comments, revision history or tracked changes retained in the file, hidden text, document properties, embedded objects and other recoverable content supported by the format. A black rectangle placed over text is not evidence that the underlying text has been removed. A fresh export may retain information too; check its actual behavior rather than assuming the conversion sanitizes it.
If the environment cannot inspect or safely edit this format, investigate a supported redaction or clean reconstruction route. Explain any practical tradeoff in format, editability or fidelity and obtain my choice when it changes the useful result. Screenshots or a pasted extract cannot establish what remains in the original file's hidden structures. If necessary, produce a clean document from the permitted content and explicitly identify which original components could not be assessed.
Produce the sharing copy
Remove the agreed material using a method that removes it from the delivered artifact. Where useful, replace names with consistent neutral labels and mark substantive omissions so sentences, tables and references still make sense. Keep redaction labels distinct from original language. Do not silently alter commitments, numerical relationships or conclusions to make the document read smoothly.
Inspect contextual clues and combinations of surviving details that could reveal what was meant to be removed. Check charts and images as well as searchable text. Preserve the document's useful structure and source meaning. Keep any private removal log separate from the sharing file; it must not travel inside comments, attachments or metadata.
For a long or complex file, assign bounded sections to agents with the agreed removal rules, relevant context and exact completion criteria. Keep a page/component coverage record and reconcile consistent substitutions centrally. Use manageable passes when agents are unavailable. Do not expose original material to a new tool or service outside the permitted working environment merely to obtain another reviewer.
Check the actual exported artifact
Open the exact file intended for delivery. Inspect every page or meaningful component visually, extract its text where supported, search for removed names and distinctive fragments, and recheck comments, tracked changes, properties and embedded content that the format and available tools permit. Check whether copying or selecting a redacted region reveals underlying text. Compare the allowed content with the source to find accidental omissions or changes in meaning.
Give a fresh reviewer the actual exported file, agreed sharing boundary and necessary original excerpts where available and permitted, without your explanation of why it is safe. Ask for surviving confidential details, indirect disclosures, recoverable content and damage to meaning. Repair findings and repeat the affected checks on the newly exported file. With no separate reviewer, perform a dedicated second pass and identify it honestly.
If a material inspection cannot be performed, name it precisely and keep the result provisional for that check. Do not claim that a visual check proves all hidden data has been removed.
Deliver the usable copy
Provide the separate sharing file, identify its filename and format, and briefly explain the categories removed, checks actually performed and any remaining inspection limits. Keep any detailed private log clearly separate. Invite me to check that it still conveys what the recipient needs; make agreed corrections and recheck affected content. Stop before sending or publishing the document.
Done when
A separate sharing copy preserves the intended meaning and has passed the applicable visible-content and recoverable-content checks, with any unperformed inspection clearly identified. The original remains intact and the document has not been sent.
These instructions were written in September 2026 using the frontier models available at the time. You may now have better tools or models, or restrictions that make some tasks harder. Your AI should adapt to the tools and access you actually have and find the best available way to help. Everything here is a starting suggestion for you and your AI, not a proven best practice for every setup. Feel free to rewrite any of it to better meet your needs.
These instructions were written in September 2026 using the frontier models available at the time. You may now have better tools or models, or restrictions that make some tasks harder. Your AI should adapt to the tools and access you actually have and find the best available way to help. Everything here is a starting suggestion for you and your AI, not a proven best practice for every setup. Feel free to rewrite any of it to better meet your needs.