Let the AI check your rota, don't let it build one

Ask an AI to build a rota with eight people, three shifts and a pile of rules, and it'll hand you one that looks fine and breaks a rule on Thursday. It's a constraint puzzle, and these tools aren't reliable at those.

Checking one you've already built is a better use. You do the hard part, then get a second pair of eyes.

Below are my rota rules and a draft rota for [WEEK / MONTH].
Check the rota against every rule, one at a time. For each rule, say
"met" or list every place it's broken (who, which day, and why).
Also point out:
- anyone working more days in a row than the rules allow
- any shift with fewer people than the minimum
- anyone with a short gap between a late finish and an early start
- anyone who ends up with all the weekends, or none
- days off that people have requested and didn't get
Don't change the rota. Just report.

Rules: [PASTE]
Requests and leave: [PASTE]
Rota: [PASTE AS A TABLE]

Making it go through the rules one at a time makes it less likely to skip one, but it doesn't guarantee it. Models misjudge grids as well. So spot-check: pick two rules and verify them yourself on the actual rota. If it got those wrong, don't trust the rest.

For the hard rules, the ones that really can't be broken, a spreadsheet does better. Ask the AI to write you the formulas (a COUNTIFS for minimum cover, conditional formatting for runs of days), and they'll check the rota the same way every time you edit it. Rest rules, like the minimum gap between shifts, can be set by law or your contract, so check those against the real source, not the AI.

The fairness check is the one a rota owner doesn't always get round to. Counting who's had the most nights over a month is tedious by hand, and it's where complaints come from.

Keep names out if the tool isn't approved for staff data. Use initials or numbers. The rota works just as well with "Person 3".