The short answer
Keep the decision, its evidence and its approval state together; a polished summary is not approval.
Extract approved decisions, owners and open questions from meeting notes without turning suggestions or summaries into commitments.Was the decision approved?
A team can discuss a June launch without approving one. Meeting summaries often blur that difference: someone proposes a date, an objection comes later, and the final summary leaves the date sounding settled.
A decision log should identify what was agreed, what is proposed and what still needs an answer. Preserve the source passage and the responsible person so a later agent can check the interpretation.
Work through an ambiguous meeting
In this fictional example, a designer suggests shipping on June 12. The engineer says the date depends on a test result. The owner asks for an updated estimate on Friday and closes the meeting without approving a launch date.
| Extracted item | Correct state | Evidence to retain |
|---|---|---|
| Launch on June 12 | Proposal; not approved. | Suggestion and unresolved dependency. |
| Send an updated estimate Friday | Assigned follow-up, if the owner and task were explicit. | The request and assignee. |
| Launch date is confirmed | Unsupported. | No approving passage exists. |
The log may contain fewer decisions than you expected. In this meeting, the launch date really is unresolved; recording it that way prevents a later agent from treating the suggestion as a commitment.
Use a record that preserves qualifications
Decision or proposal: State it in one sentence
Status: Approved / proposed / unresolved / superseded
Scope: Project and affected deliverable
Owner: Named only when supported by the source
Effective date: Explicit date, or unknown
Conditions: Preserve prerequisites and exceptions
Evidence: Source, passage and meeting date
Approval: Who confirmed the interpretation
Next review: Trigger or open questionWhen the notes say "Friday," resolve the calendar date from the meeting date and time zone. If that context is missing, leave the date unresolved. Do not substitute the day the agent happens to read the notes.
Separate extraction from commitment
Ask the agent for a draft log. Have the meeting owner check important decisions before anyone relies on them. The agent can help locate evidence and point out omissions without being allowed to send messages, assign work or update external systems automatically.
Retain rejected interpretations when they explain a correction, but label them clearly. A rejected proposal should not reappear later as an equally valid alternative just because it remains searchable.
Check the log in a later session
Ask a fresh session, "What is the approved launch date, and what blocks confirmation?" The answer should say the date is not approved and cite the dependency. Then add a fictional approval and repeat the check through the supported update workflow.
This tests whether the knowledge system distinguishes the old proposal from the new decision. It is more revealing than asking for another summary of the same meeting inside the original conversation.
Build a repeatable meeting workflow
Use the decision-log template on one set of meeting notes. Keep recordings, transcripts and other people's information within the access rules that apply to your workspace.
Gigabrain provides source-linked memory and a place to connect decisions to projects. System supports building your own loops; Pro includes the ready-made pack. Check the plan inclusions and agent requirements. You will need to provide meeting notes or connect a source your agent supports.
