Draft a Data Retention Schedule Without Guessing Periods

Start here

This is a text prompt you paste into an ordinary AI chat that accepts text. Nothing to install.

What to paste: two clearly labelled blocks. First, RECORD TYPES — each record or data type you hold, plus anything you already know such as where it is stored or a period someone wrote down. Second, LEGAL-WATCH NOTES — short notes, article excerpts or internal comments about retention obligations. Both blocks go below the prompt, in the same message.

How to check the output: the table must have one row per record type, in the fixed column order. Every period you supplied should appear word-for-word; any record type with no period must read "[BLANK - not specified]" with no number. Two sources giving different periods for the same type must be marked "conflicting" with both shown. Then read the CHECK block: it should state that blanks contain no numbers and that unspecified rows match the UNSPECIFIED ITEMS list. Anything that looks like a made-up period, regulation name or storage location means the run failed — ask again.

Missing input: if you paste only one block, the assistant should stop and ask for the other rather than filling gaps itself.

What this is for

Office and compliance-adjacent staff often inherit a loose pile of record types plus scattered notes and have to assemble a retention schedule draft. This prompt organizes only what you paste and refuses to decide legal periods. It is not legal advice, not an approved schedule and not a compliance certification, and it should not be used to tell anyone to delete data, change systems or file anything.

Permissions and limits

No tools, browsing or lookups: the assistant works only from your pasted text. It may not rename or merge record types unless you ask. It must not propose a duration for an unspecified item, and it ends by stating that a human with authority over records must review and complete every blank and conflict.

Privacy: notes about contracts, consent and customers go into a chat service, so remove names and identifiers first.

Fictional example, to show the input shape: the original prompt illustrates three rows — customer support emails, signed vendor contracts, and a marketing newsletter subscriber list — where the subscriber-list row is marked "conflicting" because two notes disagree, and the support-emails row stays "[BLANK - not specified]" with a question about the owning team. Results depend entirely on what you paste.

FAQ

Can I use the periods it produces directly? No. The output is a preparation draft. Only a person with records authority can complete blanks and resolve conflicts.

What if a note does not match any record type? It should appear verbatim under NOTES I COULD NOT PLACE so nothing is silently dropped.

Verification note

source reviewed; runtime not tested. Guidance reflects the supplied prompt text only; no test run or output sample was produced. Prompt text and reference are appended separately.

Complete reusable prompt

You are helping me assemble a first-draft data-retention schedule for internal review. You are an assistant that organizes information I provide. You are not a lawyer, and you must not decide legal retention periods or claim any period is legally required.

What I will paste

I will provide two things, clearly labelled:

1. RECORD TYPES: a list of record or data types my organization holds. Each may include a short description, where it is stored, and any period someone already wrote down.
2. LEGAL-WATCH NOTES: short notes, article excerpts, or internal comments about retention obligations. These are context only and may be incomplete, outdated, or irrelevant.

If either section is missing or empty, stop and ask me for it before doing anything else. Do not fill gaps from your own knowledge.

Your task

Produce a retention schedule table with one row per record type, in this exact column order:

| Record type | What it covers | Where stored (as stated) | Retention period | Period source | Status | Open questions |

Rules for each column:

• Record type and description: use only what I supplied. Do not rename or merge record types unless I explicitly ask.
• Where stored: copy only if I stated it; otherwise write "not stated".
• Retention period: if I gave a period for that record type, restate it exactly as given. If I did not, leave the cell as "[BLANK - not specified]" and do NOT propose a number, range, or guess.
• Period source: if the period came from my notes or the record list, cite which input and quote the short phrase it came from. If no period was given, write "none provided".
• Status: one of "specified", "unspecified", or "conflicting". Use "conflicting" when two supplied sources give different periods for the same record type; show both, do not pick one.
• Open questions: one concrete question a reviewer must answer to complete that row. For unspecified rows, the question should ask who owns the decision. For conflicting rows, ask which source governs. Keep to one sentence.

After the table, add three short sections:

1. UNSPECIFIED ITEMS: a plain list of record types with no period, so a reviewer can assign owners.
2. CONFLICTS AND GAPS: where my notes contradicted each other or where a note may not apply to any record type listed. Quote the note briefly.
3. NOTES I COULD NOT PLACE: any legal-watch note that does not clearly map to a record type, kept verbatim so nothing is silently dropped.

Uncertainty and missing input

• Never invent a retention period, a legal requirement, a regulation name, or a storage location.
• If a note is ambiguous, put it in section 3 rather than forcing it into a row.
• If two notes conflict, mark the row "conflicting" and show both.
• You may not consult outside sources, browse, or look anything up. Work only from my pasted text.

Checks before you finish

Run these on your own output and report the result as a short CHECK block:

• Every record type I listed appears exactly once.
• Every blank period cell reads "[BLANK - not specified]" and contains no number.
• Every "specified" period appears verbatim somewhere in my inputs.
• Every quote in the Period source column matches my pasted text.
• Count of unspecified rows equals the count in UNSPECIFIED ITEMS. If any check fails, fix it and say what you changed.

Boundaries and what this output is not

• This is a preparation draft only. It is not legal advice, not an approved schedule, and not a compliance certification.
• Do not tell me to delete data, change systems, notify anyone, or file anything.
• Do not claim the schedule is complete or compliant.
• End by stating clearly that a human with authority over records must review and complete every blank and conflict before this schedule is used.

Fictional example of the input shape

RECORD TYPES:

• Customer support emails — inbox archive — (no period given)
• Signed vendor contracts — shared drive — 7 years per internal note
• Marketing newsletter subscriber list — CRM — (marketing note says 2 years; legal note says keep while consent active)

LEGAL-WATCH NOTES:

• Internal comment: "contracts kept 7 years per finance policy"
• Article excerpt: "consent-based contact data should be reviewed periodically"

Illustrative output shape: three rows; contracts row shows "7 years" with a quote from the internal comment and status "specified"; the subscriber-list row shows both periods and status "conflicting"; the support-emails row shows "[BLANK - not specified]" with a question about the owning team.

Pass/fail checks tied to that example

• Pass: the support-emails period cell contains no number, because none was supplied.
• Pass: the subscriber-list row is marked "conflicting" and shows both periods rather than choosing one.
• Fail: proposing any period for support emails, or dropping the ambiguous article excerpt instead of placing it in section 3.

References and reuse

• ChatGPT release notes · Reviewed 2026-10-04

Original TokRepo prompt · CC BY 4.0. Reference documents retain their own rights.