Projects: knowledge and instructions

You will build a repeatable workspace with knowledge, instructions, and a checkable workflow. Outputs are teaching examples, not filmed runs.

A Project helps multiple chats use the same materials and rules. It is not a local folder, access to an entire organization, or Claude Code's CLAUDE.md. A one-off question may need only a normal chat.

Official documentation checked September 30, 2026 says Projects are available to free users, with a maximum of five. Expanded RAG requires a paid plan; organizational collaboration requires Team or Enterprise. Check your account before relying on sharing.

Open Projects, choose New Project, and name it "Internal course - plan and updates." The official guide says the name and description are not supplied to Claude as context. Do not hide an important instruction there.

Keep practice private if visibility options appear. Find Project knowledge and Set project instructions; positions can vary by version.

• Knowledge: source facts and documents.
• Instructions: how to use facts and format work.
• Chat message: what to do now.

Temporary to-do lists do not belong in permanent instructions. Use fictional material first.

Save as course-brief-v1.txt and add it to project knowledge:

Internal course - working brief v1
Document date: September 30, 2026
Status: fictional exercise, not a real organizational document

48 employees registered. The room holds 30 people.
The first two training units are ready. Unit 3 is being edited.
No completion date for Unit 3 was chosen. The microphone is untested.
Format is unapproved: two in-person groups or one online meeting.
There is no approved budget or launch date.

Wait for processing and check the filename. Being listed is not proof that every future answer uses every detail; test with a focused question.

Save in Set project instructions:

Goal: prepare internal course drafts.
Audience: course manager or employees, as requested in each chat.
Use knowledge documents for facts and name the source for important conclusions.
Separate facts, proposals, and missing information.
Do not invent a date, budget, approval, or owner.
If documents conflict, show the conflict and ask which is authoritative.
Do not treat a newer draft as approved just because it is newer.
Return plain-English drafts without sending or sharing them.

These are behavior instructions, not security controls or a guarantee of correctness. Start with a few checkable rules rather than pages of vague advice.

Using course-brief-v1.txt only, can one group in the existing room
accommodate all registrants at the same time?
Return source facts, calculation, conclusion, and missing details.
Do not choose a format or assume an approved date or budget.

Illustrative output:

Facts: course-brief-v1.txt lists 48 registrants and 30 room places.
Calculation: 48 - 30 = 18 people beyond capacity.
Conclusion: one group cannot fit everyone at once in this room.
Missing: approved format, Unit 3 completion date, launch date, and budget.

Open the file and check 48 and 30. The conclusion concerns the room, not an online meeting. "Two groups are required" must not be presented as an approved decision. Naming a file alone is not verification.

Separate the capacity constraint from the choice of format.
The format is still unapproved. Correct any wording that treats a proposal as a decision.

Draft a manager update, no more than 100 words.
Sections: Ready, Missing, Decision needed.
Present both format options without choosing one.
Name the source at the end. This is a draft to check.

Illustrative output:

Ready: two units are ready and 48 employees registered.
Missing: Unit 3 is being edited without a completion date; the microphone is untested.
No launch date or budget is approved.
Decision needed: two in-person groups or one online meeting.
The room holds 30, so it cannot fit all registrants at once.
Source: course-brief-v1.txt.

After checking, open a new project chat for an employee version. Project knowledge and instructions apply there, but do not assume the first chat's whole draft or decisions transfer automatically. Put an approved summary into knowledge explicitly if later chats must rely on it. Available memory is not a replacement for a maintained source.

Create course-brief-v2.txt with 42 registrations and label it "unapproved draft." Ask:

Compare v1 and v2. List changes and each document's status.
Do not choose a final registration number without a decision on which source governs.

The answer should show 48 versus 42, not silently replace one with the other. After an owner decides, update knowledge and instructions or remove the obsolete file if no longer needed.

RAG can retrieve relevant passages rather than include every document in every answer. The official guide describes automatic activation near context limits on paid plans. Larger capacity does not guarantee every fact was found. Test questions across documents and verify important claims.

Organizational sharing has Can view and Can edit levels. Check who can reach knowledge and instructions before adding internal material. Archive preserves members and permissions according to the guide; revoking access requires removing the person. Do not share this practice Project.

Easy: source calculation

Check capacity. Success: 48, 30, and 18 have the correct roles, without approving a format.

Intermediate: fresh chat

Request an employee update in a new project chat. Success: facts and rules remain correct without relying on an unprovided draft.

Challenging: conflicting versions

Add unapproved v2. Success: the answer shows conflict and status instead of silently choosing 42.

Missing fact: check the correct Project, completed processing, and filename, then request support and open the source.

Generic output: use clear goal, format, and source rules.

Draft treated as fact: label status and date, define authority, and recheck.

Too much knowledge: remove irrelevant duplication and ask focused questions.

Before real use, check currency, claims, and audience. A Project reduces repeated context; it does not replace responsibility for the result.