We Believed More Detail Was Always Better
Every morning, our Dream Team bots summarize their overnight work from the Windows device and the Mac mini and post it to Slack. At first we assumed more detail was better. But each report averaged 40 lines, and it took Bella 6 minutes to read all of it. Four times a week she thought 「I'll check it later」 and skipped it, while the truly important failure alerts sat buried in the middle of long paragraphs.
The Experiment: Change Only the Format
We added just three rules to the bots' instructions.
1. Write the conclusion in one sentence on the first line.
2. Keep the body within 5 lines.
3. List anything blocked separately in a 「Needs check」 section at the bottom.
The work stayed the same. Only the way of reporting changed.
Before / After
| Item | Before | After |
|---|---|---|
| Report length | 40 lines on average | 5 lines on average |
| Reading time | About 6 minutes | About 1 minute |
| Days skipped unread | 4 per week | 0 per week |
| Spotting failure alerts | Buried in the middle | Visible right away at the bottom |
An Unexpected Finding
We feared that shortening would lose information, but details were easy to retrieve by asking the bot for 「more detail」 when needed. Better still, once the bots started with the conclusion, they naturally dropped unnecessary play-by-play explanations.
Today's Lesson
• A report exists to support decisions, not to keep a record.
• Splitting it into conclusion, body, and blockers makes it easier on the reader.
• Detail can wait until someone asks for it.
In a small team, the reader's time is the most expensive resource.