What Did They Have to Check or Redo?
An AI-drafted update, summary or email can cost the person who gets it time you do not see. Ask them one question, then change one thing. Your AI drafted the weekly update in three minutes. You read it through, it looked right, and you sent it. What happens next happens on someone else's desk. They may trace a figure back to its source, put back the context the summary dropped, or read it twice…
When an AI-generated update is sent, the recipient may need to trace information back to its source, provide context that was omitted, or re-read the message to find necessary details. This extra work, termed "workslop," is common and affects 40% of US desk workers according to a 2025 survey. Recipients report spending nearly two hours per incident fixing issues, and 50% view the sender as less capable.
Consequently, 32% are less likely to collaborate with the sender again. To improve the process, ask the recipient what they had to check or redo after receiving the AI-generated update. Fix the first issue they mention, ensure all sources are clearly identified, and verify that the request is prominently displayed. Repeat this process with subsequent handoffs to reduce the list of issues until it is empty.
The AI-generated output does not need to be incorrect for this practice to be effective; even a correct summary can fail to capture the essence of a decision, bury a request, or obscure who is responsible for the next step. The ultimate goal is to ensure that the recipient can identify any shortcomings in the AI-generated work.
Written by urgent.news from Dev.to's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
