+ Clearly covers scope, verification, and next-time setup.
- Some UI and citation behavior is stated too definitively.
If nothing was transcribed there is nothing to recall, and it only covers from when it was switched on.
| Category | Using AI › Microsoft Copilot |
|---|---|
| Tags | SummarizingAnalyzingQuestion generation |
I want to get something out of a meeting with Copilot. **Tell me what is actually possible.** ⚠️ ***After a meeting, Copilot can only work from a transcript or recording — and only from the moment it was turned on.*** **If neither was on, there is nothing to recall, and no prompt fixes that.** 1. **Which situation I am in:** - **The meeting is happening now** — ***Copilot can answer during it without a transcript, but nothing is kept afterwards*** - **It ended and was transcribed or recorded** — ***recall works, from when it started*** - **It ended and neither was on** — ***say so plainly. What remains is the chat, the invite, and shared files — not the conversation*** 2. **What to ask for**, in the situation I am in — **decisions / owners / what I missed / what was said about one topic** 3. **What to check in the answer:** - ***Whether an owner was actually named*** — **or whether someone just agreed.** *Acknowledgment is not assignment* - **Whether the part I care about happened before recording started** 4. **What to set up for next time** — ***turned on at the start, and told to the participants*** **Also:** ***external participants may not have Copilot in these modes*** — **check before relying on it for a call with people outside the organisation.** ⚠️ ***Copilot changes fast. Do not state licence tiers, feature availability, limits, or which symbols work, from memory*** — **a guide written months ago is already wrong in places.** Write `[confirm in the tool]` and say where to check.
Post-meeting recall requires a transcript or recording and only covers from the moment it started. This says so plainly, and checks whether an owner was named rather than merely agreeing.
Gemini is the most complete and properly conditional. ChatGPT is concise but misreads the recording start, while [C] was not provided.
+ Clearly covers scope, verification, and next-time setup.
- Some UI and citation behavior is stated too definitively.
+ Turns both needs into specific, evidence-seeking prompts.
- It wrongly equates arriving late with recording starting late.
| Criterion | ChatGPT | Gemini | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Instruction following | 7 | 9 | Gemini +29% |
| Accuracy | 6 | 9 | Gemini +50% |
| Specificity | 9 | 9 | Tie |
| Structure | 8 | 9 | Gemini +13% |
| Right length | 9 | 8 | ChatGPT +13% |
Scored 1–10 by gpt-5.6-sol with model names hidden (2026-09-25). This is an AI review, not a measurement.
We gave three models the same input and copied their answers unedited. Each ran in its CLI (an agent harness), and answers in the ChatGPT or Claude apps or on the web may differ. Outputs are in Korean.
The meeting: 어제 오전 10시에 진행된 '3분기 물류센터 재고관리 개선' 팀즈 회의, 녹화는 켜뒀는데 도중에 5분 정도 늦게 들어와서 앞부분을 못 들었어 What I need: 재고 실사 담당자로 누가 정해졌는지, 다음 회의 날짜가 잡혔는지 알고 싶어
현재 상황은 회의가 종료됐고 녹화가 켜져 있었으므로, 녹화가 시작된 시점 이후의 내용은 Copilot에 물어볼 수 있는 상태입니다. 다만 녹화 시작 전 5분은 확인할 수 없습니다.
Copilot에 이렇게 물어보세요.
‘3분기 물류센터 재고관리 개선’ 회의 녹화에서, 재고 실사 담당자로 누가 명시적으로 지정되었는지 알려줘. 단순히 동의하거나 참석 의사를 밝힌 사람과 실제 담당자로 지정된 사람을 구분하고, 근거가 된 발언과 시점을 함께 제시해줘.
같은 회의에서 다음 회의 날짜와 시간이 확정되었는지 확인해줘. 확정되지 않았다면 제안만 있었는지, 누가 무엇을 말했는지 구분해줘.
내가 회의 시작 후 약 5분 늦게 들어왔어. 녹화가 시작된 시점과 내가 놓친 구간이 녹화에 포함되어 있는지 확인해줘. 녹화 시작 전 발언은 알 수 없다고 명시해줘.
답변을 확인할 때는 다음을 구분하세요.
녹화 파일이나 회의 채팅에서 직접 녹화 시작 시점, 전사본, 회의 후 요약/발언 기록도 확인하세요. Copilot의 현재 기능, 라이선스, 외부 참석자 지원 여부, 사용할 수 있는 아이콘이나 명령어는 변경될 수 있으므로 [confirm in the tool] — Teams 회의의 녹화/전사본과 Copilot 패널 또는 Microsoft 공식 안내에서 현재 지원 상태를 확인해야 합니다.