Prepare a sanitized software support case

Practice relevance

Cross-practice idea · A general operational method. Review the stated tool and jurisdiction limits before use.

The problem

Separate observed symptoms, conflicting evidence and unanswered questions.

Why it matters: A support request is harder to resolve when product versions and observed steps are mixed together. A concise evidence-linked report helps the team describe the problem without guessing its cause or exposing unnecessary information.

Sources & evidence

Proposed / not tested. The public source describes the problem. Documentation supports only the stated method components; no result from this recipe has been verified.

What’s been verified

Source methods and reported problems have been reviewed. We have not run the adapted workflow. The sample below describes expected behavior on synthetic data, not a customer result.

What to measure: In a synthetic pilot, count correctly found exceptions, false alarms, and unresolved inputs. No time or cost saving is assumed.

Pain evidence: Clio and File Explorer PC ↗Clio and File Explorer PC, 2026-05-29, older: a sole practitioner without direct IT support reports different attachment-saving behavior on an old and new computer, multiple storage destinations, and disagreement with support despite sending a screenshot. The dated public rendering establishes the date. The complaint is historical; this recipe does not endorse a commenter’s guessed technical cause.
Pain evidence: dated public rendering ↗Additional self-reported public account; no independent identity or outcome verification.
Method: Microsoft Snipping Tool guidance ↗Microsoft Snipping Tool guidance documents local screenshots/recording. Clio's official support contact page establishes the vendor's support channels. Neither proves that an assistant can diagnose or fix the issue.
Method: Clio's official support contact page ↗Additional official capability reference. The complete adapted recipe has not been tested.

Source checked: October 15, 2026. Pain accounts are self-reported. Documentation supports components; this adapted recipe and prompt have not been tested. We wrote these prompts. The adapted workflow hasn’t been tested.

Suggested approach

Start when: Repeated software issue or unresolved support exchange

structure already-observed behavior, known environment differences and safe reproduction steps
Keep source references and report unknowns instead of filling gaps.
The responsible reviewer checks the report before any separately approved action.

Limits and review

The assistant drafts or reports only. Check source records and review the output before a human performs any separately approved send or change. No automatic legal decision, money movement, account connection or publication is included.

Who reviews it: Staff/IT verifies every fact and examines each attachment before deciding what can be shared with the verified vendor. Test two different products with similar names and a screenshot that contradicts the narrative. No automatic upload or external send.

What you need

Your firm-approved AI assistant · prepared files

Actual incident notes and product/OS/version evidence already available to authorized staff; a non-sensitive test view if a screenshot is needed.
Existing firm-approved Acrobat Studio, AI Assistant add-on, or another plan including Acrobat AI; online services/cloud storage, language and region must be permitted. No purchase, login or connection is part of this verification. The manual route works without AI.
Preserve original evidence unchanged in restricted storage. Use synthetic material first. Prepare a separate, explicitly approved minimized AI input; aliases alone do not anonymize narrative or attachments. Do not upload raw originals or an alias key merely because another tab/file is sanitized.
Use synthetic inputs first. Keep real data in firm-approved accounts and processing, with appropriate access, confidentiality and retention controls. Aliases alone do not anonymize records. Never paste credentials, API keys or unnecessary client details.

How to use

Documentation-verified component path; proposed adaptation, not tested

Before you start

No universal application log export is claimed. Raw network logs, client screenshots, tokens and whole desktops are excluded. Historical observations may be reported without reproducing the failure.

Check access and setup

Actual account access, source versions/completeness, privacy approval and reviewer sign-off were not observed.

Capture only the observed symptom
Windows Snipping Tool and local incident notes · Windows+Shift+S > rectangular capture; Snipping Tool > Save
For a permitted synthetic view, capture only the relevant application area. Otherwise use already-approved evidence without reproducing the issue. Record product/version as actually observed, exact error, occurrence time/timezone, expected/actual behavior, observed steps and frequency; unknown fields remain unknown. Keep raw evidence restricted and write a separately approved text description keyed to evidence IDs.
Expected output
Sanitized incidents.txt and evidence inventory; optional sanitized screenshot stored locally.
Next step
Staff visually checks every image; only approved text descriptions, not unrestricted screenshots, enter the AI source set.
Check before continuing
Capture is a manual evidence step, not diagnosis. Never expose notifications, paths with client names, credentials or unrelated windows.
Step documentation 1 ↗
Load only the approved AI input
Acrobat PDF Spaces · Acrobat homepage > PDF Spaces > Create a PDF Space > upload files or Paste copied text > Add to PDF Space
Add sanitized incident notes and the evidence-ID descriptions. Use clear source/version labels and verify the Files panel. Do not add originals that have not separately been cleared for Adobe processing.
Expected output
Visible approved source set in the PDF Space; no account integration is implied.
Next step
Use the AI Assistant message field in this same space for the next prompt.
Check before continuing
Confirm every named source is actually loaded and readable. PDF Spaces supports up to 100 files, 100 MB and 600 pages per file; unsupported/password-protected/handwritten material blocks affected extraction.
Step documentation 1 ↗Step documentation 2 ↗Step documentation 3 ↗
Run the bounded prompt and inspect citations
Acrobat AI Assistant · The PDF Space AI Assistant message field
Paste the prompt below. Open each source-number citation, check it, and use Copy to transfer the answer into a new local Word document or text file. Correct errors using the originals before reliance.
Acrobat AI Assistant promptDraft a support case from these sanitized incident observations. Include environment, expected behavior, actual behavior, observed steps, frequency, first/last occurrence, evidence IDs and unanswered questions. Distinguish observations from hypotheses and leave missing details unknown. Cite the source note for each fact. Describe any proposed reproduction with synthetic data only; do not execute it. Exclude credentials, client information, raw logs and unrestricted screenshots. Do not diagnose a root cause as proven, contact support or change settings.
Expected output
Support-case draft and a list of attachments the human must separately approve.
Next step
Save the checked draft as support-case-review.docx; carry source IDs, versions and reviewer corrections into the next review step.
Check before continuing
Contradicting screenshot descriptions must remain a conflict; similar product names must not be merged.
Step documentation 1 ↗
Human review and final handoff
Final human review
Responsible staff reviewer and lawyer/process owner · Local reviewed report beside the frozen source set
Staff or IT confirms facts, scrubs each proposed attachment and verifies the vendor’s official support destination. Save the approved draft and attachment list locally.
Expected output
A support-ready draft with explicit unknowns and attachment approvals.
Next step
Contacting support or uploading any file is a separate authorization, not part of this documentation pass.
Check before continuing
All unresolved or unreadable evidence stays open. No inferred approval or external action follows from AI output.
Step documentation 1 ↗

What you’ll get

support-case.txt: product/environment, observed steps, expected and actual behavior, exact error, evidence references, contradictions and unanswered questions. No live reproduction, attachment review or vendor submission is implied.

Inputs and a sample test Synthetic example · not a measured result

Input files

incidents.csv: incident_id, product, product_version, os_version, browser_version, observed_at, timezone, expected_behavior, actual_behavior, observed_steps, frequency, last_known_good, exact_error, screenshot_ids, source_ref
evidence.csv: evidence_id, incident_id, evidence_type, sanitized_description, source_ref, privacy_review_status; scope.txt: historical-only reproduction boundary and approved support recipient for later review

Synthetic example

Synthetic inputs are included in the starter kit.
incidents.example.csv
evidence.example.csv
scope.example.txt

Expected output

INC1: narrative says Save absent but EV1 description says visible. Flag contradiction and ask staff to verify; do not select a cause.
INC2 belongs to Product-A Lite, not Product-A; separate environment and incident scope.
INC2 has unknown frequency, last-known-good and destination. Do not fill gaps.
Draft should include source-linked observations, hypotheses labeled unverified, and questions. No screenshot attachment may be claimed reviewed because none is supplied.

Test a failure

Staff/IT verifies every fact and examines each attachment before deciding what can be shared with the verified vendor. Test two different products with similar names and a screenshot that contradicts the narrative. No automatic upload or external send.

Try with the sample files

Follow the tool steps above and use the inputs named in each step. Where provided, native-* files are blank scaffolds and NATIVE-INPUT-MAPPING explains their fields. Original examples and the optional full review prompt use a separate prepared-input schema. Keep them separate unless the mapping explicitly connects them. Downloading a kit does not connect accounts or prove the workflow works.

Download inputs and checklist 10 files

Instructions, blank templates and separate synthetic examples; these files do not install an automation. Blank templates still need verified source data.

Download starter kit All inputs, synthetic examples and review notes in one ZIP. No automation is installed.
Start here: get the sources and prepare the review Documentation-checked acquisition, explicit manual mapping, exact prompts and human review limits
incidents.csv Blank input template with exact recipe headers.
incidents.example.csv Separate synthetic fixture input. Do not mix these rows into real exports.
evidence.csv Blank input template with exact recipe headers.
evidence.example.csv Separate synthetic fixture input. Do not mix these rows into real exports.
scope.txt Blank text input worksheet. Fill its fields with approved evidence; no default assumptions are supplied.
scope.example.txt Separate synthetic text input fixture; use with the example CSV files only.
Expected fixture findings Read-only expected output and failure conditions for the included synthetic input files.
Setup and review checklist Recipe-specific prerequisites, file mapping, prompt, setup steps, checklist and limits.

Optional full review prompt for prepared inputs

Prepared-input review prompt with Your firm-approved AI assistant · prepared files

Turn these sanitized incident notes into a support-case draft: environment, expected behavior, actual behavior, observed steps, frequency, first/last occurrence, source evidence and questions. Separate observations from hypotheses and do not fill missing details. Describe any requested reproduction using synthetic data only; do not execute it. Do not include credentials, client information, raw network logs or unrestricted screenshots. Do not contact support or change settings.

INPUTS
incidents.csv: incident_id, product, product_version, os_version, browser_version, observed_at, timezone, expected_behavior, actual_behavior, observed_steps, frequency, last_known_good, exact_error, screenshot_ids, source_ref
evidence.csv: evidence_id, incident_id, evidence_type, sanitized_description, source_ref, privacy_review_status; scope.txt: historical-only reproduction boundary and approved support recipient for later review

OUTPUT
support-case.txt: product/environment, observed steps, expected and actual behavior, exact error, evidence references, contradictions and unanswered questions. No live reproduction, attachment review or vendor submission is implied.

Use only these synthetic or firm-approved inputs and preserve source row/page IDs. Keep missing or conflicting evidence unresolved. Return a draft for the named reviewer. Do not send messages, connect accounts, change records or permissions, move money, or make legal decisions. Keep source files unchanged. List missing prerequisites before continuing.

Proposed / not tested · editorial prompt. This prompt uses the original prepared-input schema shown in the sample test. Step prompts may use different tables. Follow NATIVE-INPUT-MAPPING where supplied; do not mix the original examples with native-step inputs without mapping and checking every field.

Read original method Read pain evidence