Published October 12, 2026
Published October 12, 2026
Distinguish description from explanation
An assistant can accurately describe what a report shows: volume rose, a deadline moved, a category accounted for more exceptions, or a measure remains within a stated range. Explaining why it happened may require operational expertise or evidence outside the report. Label those two tasks separately.
Use phrases that preserve the boundary. “The recorded increase coincided with the product launch” is not the same as “the launch caused the increase.” Commentary should not turn sequence into causation.
Freeze the reporting inputs
Record the data source, extraction time, timezone, filters, and version. If a dashboard continues to change, readers need to know which snapshot the commentary addresses.
Reconcile headline totals before writing. An eloquent explanation attached to mismatched numbers damages trust and creates avoidable review work.
Give every paragraph a job
A compact structure works well: what changed, compared with what, material context, operational consequence, and any decision required. Omit observations that do not change understanding or action.
Keep denominators visible when using rates. A large percentage move based on a handful of cases deserves different language from the same move across thousands of records.
Maintain an evidence note
For each material sentence, link the table, source record, or owner confirmation that supports it. The note can remain internal, but it should make review fast. Mark assumptions, estimates, and incomplete data explicitly.
If an operational owner supplies an explanation, attribute it in the working record and confirm that the wording is approved for the report’s audience.
Handle anomalies carefully
Check definition changes, missing periods, duplicates, late entries, system migrations, and one-time events before calling an outlier meaningful. Do not smooth away a valid exception merely because it complicates the narrative.
When evidence is insufficient, state the observation and next check. A disciplined “cause not yet established” is more useful than a confident guess.
Route judgments to the owner
Recommendations involving policy, staffing, budget, performance, or public commitments belong to an accountable decision maker. The assistant can frame options and consequences, then capture the approved conclusion.
Set a focused review window. Ask owners to verify only the interpretations and decisions that require their expertise, not formatting already covered by the standard.
Preserve revisions
Track substantive changes between draft and approved commentary. If a number or interpretation changes, update the supporting note and any summary that repeats it.
After publication, archive the final report with its evidence snapshot and approval. The next cycle can then compare like with like instead of reconstructing definitions from memory.
Delegating commentary works when the assistant owns evidence hygiene and clear writing while specialists retain authority for causal claims and consequential recommendations.
This guide was published on October 12, 2026. For adjacent workflows, explore the Delegation Assistant blog or review the deeper evidence in Research.