update

prompts.json

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
     "Prompts": {
         "System" : ["You are an expert in career advice and personality consultant. Do not infer or assume information beyond what's explicitly provided in the conversation. Avoid drawing on external knowledge or making generalizations not directly supported by the report content. Do not answer unrelevant questions."],
         "METAEIP": [
-            "Analyze the profiles of team members in ### Team Members ### based on ### Descriptions ###, and answer the ### Questions ### in around 800 words. Use test taker when referring to team members instead of actual name. Score: LOW (0-33.33), AVERAGE (33.34-66.66), HIGH (66.67-100). Display the scores in the order High to Low.",
+            "Analyze the profiles of team members in ### Team Members ### based on ### Descriptions ###, and answer the ### Questions ### in around 800 words. Use test taker when referring to team members instead of actual name. Score: LOW (0-33.33), AVERAGE (33.34-66.66), HIGH (66.67-100). Display the scores in the order High to Low. Ensure that placeholder tags such as ‘[Descriptions]’ are not included in the final output text. Use natural language only.",
             "### Team Members ###",
             "{{TEAM_MEMBERS}}",
             "### Descriptions ###",
@@ -20,10 +20,10 @@
 
             "### Questions ###",
             "1. Write a section with the title: \"Profile Summary\" summarizing the test taker scores,the key points and strategies for leveraging entrepreneurial potential while addressing challenges. Write them in a single paragraph around 50-100 words.",
-            "2. Analyze the whole key strengths, weaknesses, and potential risks (In short paragraphs with headers for main profile and red flags, for example: Vision (High) and Influence (High), etc., do not output scores) with the titles: \"STRENGTHS\", \"AREAS FOR DEVELOPMENT\", \"WEAKNESSES\" for main profile and \"RISKS\" for red flag, considering the relationship between trait scores i.e. what the combination of scores tells us. If no Red Flags have HIGH, remove the \"Red Flags\" section. Do not include the \"Red Flags\" section if all red flag scores are AVERAGE or LOW."
+            "2. Analyze the whole key strengths, weaknesses(area for development), and potential risks (In short paragraphs with headers for main profile and red flags, for example: Vision (High) and Influence (High), etc., do not output scores) with the titles: \"STRENGTHS\", \"AREAS FOR DEVELOPMENT\" for main profile and \"RISKS\" for red flag, considering the relationship between trait scores i.e. what the combination of scores tells us. If no Red Flags have HIGH, remove the \"Red Flags\" section. Do not include the \"Red Flags\" section if all red flag scores are AVERAGE or LOW. When writing the ‘STRENGTHS’ section, ensure traits are ordered from highest to lowest scores."
         ],
         "TDOS": [
-            "Analyze the profiles of team members in ### Descriptions ###, ### Team Members ###, and answer the ### Questions ### in around 800 words. Use neutral prouns (they/them) when referring to team members. Score: LOW (0-33.33), AVERAGE (33.34-66.66), HIGH (66.67-100). Display the scores in the order High to Low.",
+            "Analyze the profiles of team members in ### Descriptions ###, ### Team Members ###, and answer the ### Questions ### in around 800 words. Use neutral prouns (they/them) when referring to team members. Score: LOW (0-33.33), AVERAGE (33.34-66.66), HIGH (66.67-100). Display the scores in the order High to Low. Ensure that placeholder tags such as ‘[Descriptions]’ are not included in the final output text. Use natural language only.",
             "### Descriptions ###",
             "#### Main Profile Descriptions ####",
             "VISION: Sees the ‘big picture’ and maintains line of sight. Alignment of goals and actions.",