Overview
Compare your Interactive Map content with official website information to identify updates worth reviewing. This prompt asks your preferred AI tool to start with up to three impactful findings, show the evidence, and separate confirmed differences from questions that need verification.
AI tools change rapidly, and results are not guaranteed. Review the recommendations before making changes.
Tip: The CMS Dashboard flags common content issues, including missing descriptions or media and locations that haven't been edited in over 24 months. Use its recommendations to help prioritize the content you review with this prompt. Contact your Partner Success manager to enable the Dashboard.
Before you start
Provide only public information or information your organization has approved for the AI tool you choose. Review any export before sharing it and remove private or internal information that is outside that approval.
| Input | What to provide |
|---|---|
| Required: organization | Your organization's name so similarly named locations can be matched carefully. |
| Required: map content | A location CSV export or pasted location names, descriptions, and other details to compare. Keep record IDs when available. |
| Required: official sources | Relevant official website links or pasted source text. Include the information needed to check the supplied map records. |
| Optional: dates and recent changes | Known source dates, approved changes, or a content owner's confirmation of which information is current. |
| Optional: review scope | A group of locations or fields to focus on, such as building names or service descriptions. |
To download location data, open Data Export in the CMS, select Locations, and use the export action. See Data Export for current instructions. A map URL can provide context, but the tool may still need an export or pasted content to read the locations.
How to use this prompt
- Open your preferred AI tool and add the map content and official sources you want it to compare. If the tool cannot access a link or file, paste the relevant text.
- Copy the entire prompt below and replace the bracketed placeholders with your information. Keep the safeguards and review instructions in the prompt.
- Submit the prompt and answer any questions about missing information. Review the first findings before requesting another group.
Copy the prompt
Select and copy all the text in this block.
Help me review our Concept3D Interactive Map for content that may be outdated.
Organization: [name]
Map content: [attach an export or paste location details]
Official sources: [relevant website links or pasted text]
Known source dates or recent changes: [details, if available]
Review scope: [locations or fields to focus on, if applicable]
Compare the supplied location names, descriptions and other details with the official sources. Match locations carefully and flag uncertain matches. Do not assume the website is newer or more accurate when the evidence is unclear.
Begin with a brief note describing the content and sources you reviewed, anything you could not access, and any limits on the review. Do not present a partial review as a complete map audit.
Start with up to three of the most impactful findings, prioritized by their likely effect on visitors and the strength of the evidence. Recommend fewer if the evidence supports fewer. For each finding, include:
- The affected location and record ID, if supplied.
- The current map content and the conflicting source information.
- The supporting source link or reference, plus its date if available.
- The suggested correction and the reason for its priority.
- Whether this is a confirmed difference or a question that needs verification.
Keep confirmed differences separate from uncertain matches and unresolved questions. A confirmed difference does not automatically establish which source is correct. Do not invent location names, hours, services, parking rules, accessibility details, coordinates or directions.
Use only public or organization-approved information I provide. If you cannot access a link or upload, ask me to paste the relevant content. Ask for missing information rather than inventing facts or product capabilities. Provide recommendations for my review; do not assume you can make changes to the product. Clearly flag uncertainty and remind me to verify the output before acting. AI tools change rapidly, and results are not guaranteed.
Finish with the questions I need to resolve before approving updates. Then offer to review the next three findings and wait for my response before continuing.Review your results
- Confirm the location. Check the name and record ID against the intended map location. Resolve uncertain matches before editing, especially when multiple records have similar names.
- Inspect the evidence. Open the cited source and compare the exact information. Confirm dates and ask the responsible content owner which source is correct. A difference alone does not prove the map is outdated.
- Approve the correction. Confirm that the proposed change is supported, keeps necessary context, and does not introduce unverified facts. Record unresolved questions and obtain approval before applying updates.
When updates are approved, use the CMS workflow described in The Location Manager: Your Map's Editing Workspace. For suitable changes across multiple locations, review Bulk Edit: Changing Many Map Locations at Once. Bulk Upload adds new locations; it does not update existing records.
Tips for Success
Start with a manageable set of locations and the official pages that cover them. Resolve the first findings with the appropriate content owners, then ask for the next three. Treat this as a content review of the supplied material, not a verification of every marker, map rendering, route, image, or link.
Related prompts
Return to Start Here: Using the AI Prompt Library to choose another task. Planned next steps include organizing map categories and improving map descriptions for search and AI discovery.