A city attorney’s aide finds Copilot remembering a mistaken preference to cite draft opinions. What should they do?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
Copilot clinging to a bad habit of citing draft opinions? Clear or revise that memory or those instructions. You’re the boss of what it remembers.
Full Explanation
When Copilot remembers a bad habit—here, citing draft opinions—the user must govern that memory or instruction set. Clearing or revising the memory or instructions that caused the mistaken preference is correct because municipal legal drafting standards require intentional control of what the assistant treats as normal. Draft opinions are often non-final and inappropriate as blanket citations in public memos; leaving the preference intact reproduces legal risk.
Leaving the mistaken preference in place so drafts keep citing draft opinions fails quality and professional responsibility. Adding more draft opinions as mandatory citations in every public memo amplifies the error and can mislead readers about controlling authority. Disabling all human review of legal language going forward removes the essential safeguard for attorney work product and public legal communications.
Exam caveat: clearing a mistaken preference fixes future defaults, but already-sent drafts that cited draft opinions may still need human remediation if they left the office. Operational check: inspect memory and instructions for the draft-opinion preference, clear or rewrite it to require final authorities only (or counsel-approved cites), regenerate a sample memo, and restore human legal review as a standing gate.