{
  "draft_title": "Inbox practice: define the output",
  "share": false,
  "platforms": {
    "x": {
      "enabled": true,
      "posts": [
        {
          "text": "1/ I practiced an inbox workflow with 8 synthetic emails: define classification rules, then review a table, reply drafts and a daily brief. This shares the practice method; a real inbox workflow remains unverified."
        },
        {
          "text": "2/ The rules use 6 business labels plus Review for uncertainty. Missing context becomes a question; each email has one primary workflow label."
        },
        {
          "text": "3/ There are 2 reply drafts. Unknown meeting times, prices and delivery dates stay pending for a person to decide."
        },
        {
          "text": "4/ The sequence: calibrate samples → check real tools → small trial → acceptance → Skill → consider a Routine. Review each stage separately."
        },
        {
          "text": "5/ This exercise measured no time savings or accuracy and wrote nothing to Gmail. Define inputs, outputs and exceptions before deciding whether to automate."
        }
      ]
    },
    "linkedin": {
      "enabled": true,
      "posts": [
        {
          "text": "I used 8 synthetic emails to practice defining a clear deliverable.\n\nThe output is a classification table, 2 reply drafts and a daily brief. Six business labels plus Review retain emails with missing context.\n\nTwo checks matter: each judgment traces to its source email, and a draft never confirms an unknown time, price or delivery date.\n\nReal Gmail tools, a small live trial and human acceptance still need checking before a Skill or Routine. No time savings or accuracy were measured, and no real inbox was written.\n\nWhich recurring deliverable would you define first?"
        }
      ]
    }
  }
}