MODE: Standalone Future Function situation: early-stage future personal object for daytime rest 🔍 Auto-detected: Priority axes F1 Real Need, F2 Core Job, F3 Function Tiers, F12 Key Moment, F4 Function Links, target gaps F1 Real Need, F2 Core Job, F3 Function Tiers, F12 Key Moment, Concept Maturity≈1, Ambition≈4 (based on: core function definition is still open for a future personal object; new class is implied by the undeveloped product direction) — override anything above by specifying it manually in your brief. TOP-3 DIRECTIONS: 1️⃣ F1 Real Need + F2 Core Job + F3 Function Tiers + F12 Key Moment + F4 Function Links + F7 Use Logic (k=6) — connects need, core job, routine, and action chain 🟢 BEST-FIT — READY-TO-USE PROMPT BELOW Target Set covered: Yes; Compatibility: Compatible — F4 fits early maturity and substantial-to-new-class ambition Core: F2 Core Job + F4 Function Links; Weak link: F3 Function Tiers + F7 Use Logic 2️⃣ F1 Real Need + F2 Core Job + F3 Function Tiers + F12 Key Moment + F8 Ease of Use + F11 Use Loop (k=6) — emphasizes repeatable, low-effort daytime recovery Target Set covered: Yes; Compatibility: Compatible — F8 accommodates an early concept without constraining ambition 3️⃣ F1 Real Need + F2 Core Job + F3 Function Tiers + F12 Key Moment + F9 Unusual Use + F10 Function Detail (k=6) — explores differentiated use while structuring function depth Target Set covered: Yes; Compatibility: Compatible — F9 aligns with early maturity and ambitious future exploration ──────────────────── 🟢 READY-TO-USE PROMPT (based on 1️⃣): Текст Work as a discussion aid for a future personal object intended to help night-shift workers rest during the day. The current situation leaves the real need, main job, basic versus optional functions, fit across the daily routine and weeks, and critical moment unresolved. The visual direction is also undecided, and the untested idea of operating without a power source should be treated as a dependency for Future Design Finder or Future Innovation Finder rather than as an established property. Compare function approaches that fit the chosen axes. Every approach is a hypothesis. Do not predict market, demand, price, timing, patents, safety, legal or regulatory status, or technical feasibility. Do not name or recommend brands, models, or companies. Do not choose the concept for the user. Label every hypothesis clearly and mark every assumption. Never invent figures. Never present an invented technology as existing. Treat all output as a discussion aid, not professional advice. F1 Real Need. Work with the user to clarify the actual rest-related need night-shift workers experience during daytime recovery, separating symptoms, desired outcomes, constraints, and assumptions. Check what problem is recurring enough to matter and what evidence would distinguish a real need from a guessed preference. Do not claim prevalence or demand. Gate: go only when the need can be stated plainly and the team agrees what remains unknown; no-go if the proposed need is still a collection of unrelated problems. F2 Core Job. Work with the user to express the single main job the object is expected to perform, using an action-to-result statement rather than a feature list. Compare alternative job statements as hypotheses and identify what each would make secondary. Gate: go when one main job is clear enough to organize function choices; no-go when several jobs remain equally primary. F3 Function Tiers. Separate essential functions from optional or extra functions. For each proposed function, explain which part of the main job it serves, what user action it requires, and whether removing it would break the core job. Keep the tiering provisional and assumption-marked. Gate: go when a minimal core set and a separate extra set are visible; no-go if optional features are being used to compensate for an undefined core job. F12 Key Moment. Identify the critical moment when the object most needs to help, such as the transition into daytime rest or a disruption during rest, without assuming which moment is correct. Compare candidate moments as hypotheses and trace the action-to-result chain at each one. Gate: go when one critical moment is sufficiently specific to test function choices against it; no-go when the moment is still too broad to distinguish approaches. F4 Function Links. Connect the candidate functions to the worker's real routine across days and weeks. Map when the object is obtained, prepared, used, adjusted, stored, cleaned or maintained, and put away, but only where those actions are relevant. Look for conflicts between the function set and the routine. Gate: go when the core functions have a coherent place in repeated use; no-go if the proposed function requires a routine that contradicts the user's stated context. F7 Use Logic. For each leading function direction, trace action to immediate effect to intended rest outcome, including necessary inputs and feedback. Mark missing links as assumptions rather than filling them with invented mechanisms. Gate: go when the chain is understandable enough for comparison; no-go if the claimed result depends on unexplained steps. Use a staged sequence. Stage 1: clarify F1 and F2, then run a go or no-go gate. Stage 2: define F3 and F12 together, then gate whether the function set and critical moment are coherent. Stage 3: map F4 and test F7 across the strongest function hypotheses, then gate whether the directions remain coherent in repeated routine use. Stage 4: carry the surviving directions into qualified review and decision preparation; do not turn the review into a verdict. Ask a qualified product engineer to examine function dependencies, inputs, maintenance needs, and unresolved technical questions without giving a feasibility conclusion. Ask a usability specialist to examine effort, cognitive load, transitions into rest, repeated use, and possible routine conflicts without claiming user demand. Ask a legal or safety adviser to identify questions that require professional review and to flag where formal advice is needed, without making legal, regulatory, patent, or safety conclusions in this discussion. Track risks such as an undefined need, an overloaded core job, optional functions masking essential gaps, routine conflict, an incorrectly chosen key moment, and unexplained action-to-result chains. For each risk, define a revisit point. Stop a direction from advancing when a risk invalidates one of the chosen axes or when an assumption is being treated as fact. Revisit rather than resolve any question that requires professional evidence. For the first 30 days, or until the stated decision date if that comes first, use this sequence: days 1-7 clarify the need and main job; days 8-14 separate core and optional functions and identify the critical moment; days 15-21 map routine links and use logic; days 22-30 compare hypotheses, prepare professional questions, document assumptions, and identify the next decision gate. At each step, record what is known, what is assumed, what is unresolved, and what evidence or professional input is needed. Keep the comparison compact and explicit. Do not assign numerical scores unless the user supplies a justified scoring method. Do not infer market, demand, price, timing, patents, safety, legal or regulatory status, or technical feasibility from the comparison. Treat the power-free idea as an untested hypothesis and do not describe it as achievable or existing. Treat appearance as undecided and keep it separate from function decisions unless the user provides a reason to connect them. The purpose is to structure discussion and comparison, not to select a winning concept. Negative prompt / avoid: undefined core job, feature-led thinking, optional functions masking essentials, routine conflict, vague critical moments, unexplained action-to-result chains, invented technology claims ──────────────────── ℹ️ "This tool compares future product function directions and builds a discussion prompt; it does not choose for you, state market, price, timing, patent, safety, legal, or feasibility conclusions, or predict how a concept will turn out." Assumptions made: No assumptions were needed. ❓ Want a different direction? Reply "expand #2" or "expand #3" to get a full prompt built from that candidate instead. 💡 Have a clear brief already and just want one direct prompt? Search "Universal Instruction Generator" on PromptBase for a single-pass generator. ⚙️ "Built for ChatGPT; other AI models, providers, and versions are untested. Use at your own discretion. This tool is not intended as a sole safeguard against attempts to alter its behavior, nor as a substitute for professional legal, financial, and subject-matter advice before acting on its output."