Phase 4 · Gemini
Gemini prompt library
Why it matters
A copy-ready set of workplace prompts for Gemini, the ones worth keeping within reach rather than reinventing each time. They're grouped by where you'll use them, written in the Fernway world so you can see the shape, and built with the honesty habits this course teaches baked in: name the format, state the limits, and ask the tool to flag what it can't verify. Swap Fernway's details for your own and they're ready to use.
Every prompt below follows the same durable pattern you've practised: a clear task, enough context to aim it, the format you want back, and, where it matters, an instruction to be honest about what it can't do. They're written around the Fernway Group sample world so the shape is concrete; replace the names, figures and files with your own to use them for real.
A standing reminder as you copy them: keep to the Phase 0 privacy rules. Practise on the Fernway files or your own non-confidential material, and don't paste anything sensitive into a personal account. And whatever a prompt returns, stay the editor. The verify clauses built into these prompts help, but the final check is yours.
Gmail
Summarise this email thread in four bullets: what's being decided, where people disagree, and what's outstanding. Then draft a short, warm reply from me that moves it forward with one clear next step. Use British spelling, keep the reply under 120 words, and don't invent any details that aren't in the thread.
Why this works: Asking for a short summary plus a clearly-separated draft reply gives you something to act on in one pass, and the 'don't invent details' line stops it filling gaps in a thread it may have misread.
Draft a reply to this customer email. They're annoyed but polite. I want to apologise sincerely without over-promising, explain we're fixing how we track issues, and offer to sort it this week. Warm, professional, about 120 words, British spelling. Don't invent order numbers, dates or figures I haven't given you.
Why this works: Naming the situation, the tone and the outcome you can offer turns a generic template into a genuine reply, and forbidding invented specifics keeps it honest about what you've actually promised.
Here are the subject lines and senders of my unread emails. Group them into: needs a reply today, can wait, and no action needed. For each 'today' item, add one line on why and a suggested next step. Flag anything where you're unsure of the priority rather than guessing.
Why this works: Asking for a ranked list with a reason and a suggested action per item turns a full inbox into a plan, and requesting a flag for anything ambiguous keeps you in control of the judgement calls.
From this email thread, list every action anyone committed to, as a table with columns Action, Owner, Due date. Mark any action with no clear owner as UNASSIGNED and any with no date as 'no date given'. Only use what's actually in the thread. Don't infer owners or dates.
Why this works: A fixed table with an explicit UNASSIGNED rule gives you a clean, scannable set of commitments and stops the tool inventing an owner or date the thread never stated.
Docs
Summarise this document in a three-sentence overview a busy manager could read at a glance, followed by the three most important points as bullets. Then note anything important the document leaves unresolved. Keep the whole thing under 150 words, British spelling.
Why this works: Specifying the audience and a strict length forces a genuine executive summary rather than a shrunk copy of the document, and 'note what it leaves open' surfaces the gaps that matter most before a decision.
Rewrite this internal note so it works for customers: plain, friendly, no jargon or internal names. Keep every figure, date and commitment exactly as written. Do not change any of them. Flag any sentence that assumes internal knowledge a customer wouldn't have, rather than guessing what to put instead.
Why this works: Telling it who will read the new version and what to keep unchanged steers a real rewrite rather than a light paraphrase, and protecting the figures stops it quietly altering anything factual.
Turn these rough notes into a structured first draft with these sections: Background, What we're proposing, Who does what, Timeline, Risks. Where the notes don't cover a section, write '[needs input]' rather than making something up. Keep it concise and in British English.
Why this works: Giving it the exact sections you want produces a usable first draft in your shape instead of a wall of prose, and the instruction to mark gaps stops it inventing content to fill a heading.
Tighten this draft: cut it by about a third, remove jargon and passive voice, and keep the meaning and all facts intact. British spelling. Below the rewrite, list the three biggest changes you made so I can check nothing important was lost.
Why this works: A specific brief (shorter, plainer, keep the meaning) plus a request to list its own changes lets you see and approve what it altered rather than trusting a silent rewrite.
Sheets
Give me a formula to total each rep's sales in this sheet, ignoring blank cells. Explain in plain English what it does and which columns it uses, then tell me one quick way to check the result by hand against a couple of rows. Don't assume the columns are clean. Mention anything that could throw it off.
Why this works: Asking for the formula plus a plain-English explanation and a manual check builds in the verify step. A formula that runs can still point at the wrong column, and one hand-checked row catches that.
From this sales data, summarise the three clearest trends by region and product in plain English, with the numbers behind each. Then list anything in the data that looks odd, inconsistent or worth double-checking before I rely on this, including possible typos in labels or missing values.
Why this works: Asking for the pattern plus what to double-check keeps a data summary honest. It points you at the figures to verify rather than presenting a confident story you might act on unchecked.
Review this spreadsheet for data-quality problems: inconsistent date formats, misspelled or duplicated category labels, blank required cells, and totals that don't match units times price. List each issue with the row it's on and a suggested fix, but don't change anything; just flag it so I can decide.
Why this works: Data-cleaning is where quiet errors hide, so asking it to flag issues rather than silently fix them keeps you deciding what's really wrong. A misspelled region shouldn't be merged without your say-so.
Research
Research the current UK market for small-business subscription software: the main players, typical pricing models, and what small firms say they value most. I want a briefing to sharpen how we position a starter tier against a mid tier. Show me your research plan first so I can edit it before you browse.
Why this works: A specific topic with a stated audience and purpose gives Deep Research a real brief, so the plan it proposes is aimed at your decision, letting you steer it at the cheapest possible point.
Compare these three options against my criteria: cost, ease of setup, and support quality. Give me a table scoring each, a short recommendation with the trade-offs, and a separate list of anything you couldn't confirm from a reliable source. Link the source for each factual claim.
Why this works: Naming your decision criteria and asking for a table plus an honest 'what I couldn't confirm' turns a research answer into a decision aid you can actually check, rather than a persuasive-sounding conclusion.
For the report you just produced, list the three claims that rest on the weakest or fewest sources, and any points where your sources disagreed. For each, give me the link so I can check it myself. Then tell me what important question this report couldn't answer.
Why this works: Asking a report to expose its own weakest evidence and disagreements flips a polished write-up into a checkable draft. You find the soft spots deliberately instead of hoping there aren't any.
General
From these meeting notes, give me: (1) a three-sentence overview a manager could skim, (2) a list of decisions made, and (3) an actions table with columns Action, Owner, Due date. Mark any action with no owner as UNASSIGNED. Only use what's in the notes; don't invent owners or dates.
Why this works: A fixed three-part output gives you the same scannable record every time, and the explicit UNASSIGNED rule stops the tool inventing owners or dates the notes never stated.
Explain [topic] to a non-technical colleague in about 120 words, no jargon, with one everyday analogy. Then add a single line on the most common misunderstanding people have about it, so I can head it off. British spelling.
Why this works: Setting the audience and the length forces an accessible explanation, and asking for the one thing people usually get wrong adds the insight a plain summary would miss.
I need to propose [change] to my manager. Play the sceptical manager: give me the five most likely realistic objections, in priority order, and for each a fair one-line response I could give. Keep the objections realistic for a busy UK workplace. Don't invent extreme scenarios.
Why this works: Asking it to argue the other side surfaces the objections you'll actually face, and keeping it to realistic points stops it inventing far-fetched scenarios you don't need to prepare for.
Draft a short message to announce [change] to the team: clear, warm, and honest about what it means for them. Then, separately, review your own draft and flag any sentence that could read as abrupt, vague or over-promising, with a suggested softer wording for each. British spelling, under 150 words.
Why this works: Producing the draft and a tone read in one go lets you catch anything that lands wrong before you send it, and asking for specific risky phrases is more useful than a vague reassurance that it's 'fine'.