Working examples
Sample questions and ways to check the Advisor's answers.
The examples below show how to phrase a question and what to check in the answer. They are task suggestions, not reports of actual events. Results depend on the available sources, the selected period and access permissions.
Example 1 — Votes
Query:
Which Civic Coalition MPs voted against the proposed amendment to the energy bill at the last Sejm sitting? Show the result and link the vote.
What to expect:
The Advisor identifies the relevant sitting and amendment, then checks the vote and individual MPs' choices. If several amendments match, it may ask which one is meant.
The answer should identify the sitting, date and vote, state the result and list the matching MPs with source links. Open the cited vote to verify both the result and the individual choices.
Example 2 — Public stance versus voting record
Query:
Compare a selected parliamentary club's public statements on phasing out coal with its votes on related amendments in the last month. Identify any differences and cite both sides.
What to expect:
The Advisor compares statements and votes from the requested period. The answer should distinguish a club's position from the statements and votes of individual members, and distinguish votes against, abstentions and absences.
Each comparison should link to the statement and the vote. A difference in wording or an absence does not by itself establish a contradiction; check whether both sources concern the same proposal.
Example 3 — Analysis of an attached file
Query:
Summarize the regulatory recommendations in this briefing and check whether any have progressed in Parliament.
Attach the briefing through @ before sending the message.
What to expect:
The Advisor reads the attached material and compares its recommendations with available legislative records. The answer should separate what the briefing recommends from what Parliament has actually done.
Open citations to check the relevant passages and legislative stages. If no matching proposal is found, treat that as a limit of the search, not proof that no proposal exists.
Example 4 — Preparing an alert with a clarifying question
Query:
Prepare an alert for new developments on the pharmaceutical reform bill.
What to expect:
If several bills match, the Advisor can present a clarifying question. Select the intended bill and use Continue in that question.
A prepared alert appears as a Monitoring setup card with Setup required · Monitoring is not active. Open it to review the scope and sources in the Tracker, then save the alert to activate monitoring. If the conversation is still open when the draft is ready, Persate opens the creator automatically.
See Creating alerts for the final configuration steps.
Example 5 — What was said at a sitting
Query:
At the latest Justice Committee sitting, where did the chair announce the schedule for the public procurement amendment? Quote the exact words.
What to expect:
The Advisor looks for the relevant recording and statement. A supported answer includes the quoted passage and a citation that opens the recording at the relevant moment.
Listen to that passage and its context before reusing a quotation. If the recording or transcript is unavailable, the answer should identify the gap instead of supplying an unsupported quotation.
Example 6 — Multi-source legislative briefing
Query:
I need a one-page brief on the renewable energy bill: legislative status, recent committee work, how the clubs have voted on it so far, and what they say publicly.
What to expect:
For a broad request, the Advisor can show a plan and divide the research into parts. Follow progress in the activity view.
A useful briefing separates legislative status, committee work, votes and public statements, with sources for each section. Check the dates and whether the answer covers the whole request. If part remains unresolved, narrow the follow-up to that topic or period.
Checking the result
- Open source citations and compare them with the claim they support.
- Check the period, legislative term and identity of the people or proposals involved.
- Distinguish source facts, the Advisor's interpretation and missing information.
- Use a narrower follow-up when the answer is partial or the available evidence is inconclusive.