weatherreporter/internal/promptassets/assets/prompts/common/data_package.user.md

Your task is to generate a local weather forecast analysis from the following YAML data package, which is prepared by the weatherreporter application.

Your analysis will be incorporated into a structured, user-facing report. The report may be for today, tomorrow, or a future date. You will be provided with precise output instructions following the YAML data package.

SOURCE ROLES AND WEIGHTING

Use report and briefing.metadata for framing: location, timezone, units, valid period, and generation time. Do not treat metadata as forecast evidence except where it identifies source relevance, such as alert counts or location matching.

For weather interpretation, think in four source layers, in this order:

1. Active hazard and risk products

Give appropriate weight to official hazard or risk products that the package identifies as relevant to the forecast location and valid period. This includes current or future package sections for alerts, watches, warnings, advisories, SPC outlook polygon hits, WPC excessive rainfall outlook polygon hits, mesoscale discussions, precipitation discussions, or similar location-matched products.

These products have already been filtered or matched to the forecast location. Treat them as locally relevant, but distinguish product strength:

• Active warnings are urgent and should dominate the lead and relevant sections.
• Watches and advisories should be mentioned prominently when they affect the report period.
• Outlook/risk polygon hits may or may not be important local risk signals. Higher risk levels deserve greater attention, but do not imply severe weather is likely or probable at the exact point without support.
• Mesoscale and precipitation discussions are strong short-term situational-awareness signals when they cover the location and valid period.

For the current schema, use briefing.applicable_risk_products.alert_digest and briefing.metadata.alerts to determine whether relevant local alerts exist. If relevant_count is zero, do not imply that the report location is under an active alert merely because active_count is nonzero.

2. Derived summaries

Use derived summaries as the baseline interpretation of the local forecast when no active hazard product requires stronger framing.

• Use briefing.derived_daily_summary, if present, for the overall daily theme, high/low temperature, dominant conditions, daily precipitation probability, most likely precipitation hour, and thunder flag.
• Use briefing.derived_daypart_summaries, if present, for daypart timing, dominant conditions, temperature ranges, maximum precipitation chances, and notable conditions.
• Use briefing.precip_timing, if present, as the deterministic summary of maximum precipitation probability and whether thunder is mentioned in the structured local forecast.
• Use briefing.outdoor_windows, if present, only if it adds meaningful signal to the daypart discussion. Do not turn the report into outdoor-planning advice.

3. Narrative products

Use briefing.narrative_products for meteorological context, prose framing, uncertainty, and conditional outcomes. These products can add significant value, but broad regional language must not override point-specific local data without support.

• Use briefing.narrative_products.narrative_forecast.periods to confirm and reconcile official day/night wording, high/low temperatures, winds, and broad precipitation wording.
• Use briefing.narrative_products.weather_story and briefing.narrative_products.area_forecast_discussion.key_messages as public-facing context, while accounting for their broad coverage and update cadence.
• Use briefing.narrative_products.area_forecast_discussion.short_term for setup, local or regional nuance, confidence, uncertainty, and forecast dependencies affecting the next 12–48 hours.
• Use briefing.narrative_products.area_forecast_discussion.long_term only when it affects the valid day, the overnight period immediately following it, or supports a brief note about following days.
• Use briefing.narrative_products.spc_convective_discussion.discussions for severe-weather context when present, preserving geographic limitations and accounting for stale outlooks.

4. Raw underlying data

Use briefing.raw_data as the source of truth for exact timing, temperatures, precipitation probabilities, wind, humidity/dew point, and condition changes when more detail is needed. briefing.raw_data.hourly_forecast.periods is the most granular local forecast source. Use briefing.raw_data.current_conditions only as generation-time context.

If raw data and derived summaries appear to disagree, prefer raw data for exact values and timing, but treat the disagreement as a reason to be cautious rather than as permission to invent an explanation.

CONFLICT RESOLUTION

When sources differ, ask:

1. Which source is most local to the forecast point?
2. Which source is valid for the report period or near-term window?
3. Which source is most authoritative for the type of claim being made?
4. Is the source describing the most likely outcome, or a conditional/low-probability hazard?

Do not turn regional severe-weather discussion into a deterministic local severe-weather forecast unless point-specific data supports that conclusion. Conversely, do not bury a location-specific warning, watch, advisory, outlook polygon hit, or valid mesoscale discussion merely because the baseline derived summary is otherwise quiet.

HAZARD AND PRECIPITATION RULES

Mention a hazard only to the extent supported by location-specific products, local structured forecast data, or clearly applicable narrative text. Preserve product strength, uncertainty, geography, and timing. Do not say storms “arrive,” “clear,” “develop,” or “move in” at a specific time unless a local source supports that timing.

Use precipitation wording consistently:

• 0–14%: usually omit unless relevant to a trend, caveat, hazard product, regional risk, or timing uncertainty.
• 15–24%: “slight chance,” “isolated,” “spotty,” or “brief passing shower/storm possible.”
• 25–39%: “chance,” “scattered,” or “some showers/storms possible.”
• 40–59%: “good chance” or “showers/storms likely enough to plan around.”
• 60%+: “likely,” “wet,” or “unsettled,” if consistent with the narrative forecast.

If the package does not provide rainfall amounts, say nothing about totals unless a narrative product provides a supported qualitative signal. Do not invent QPF. If local precipitation chances are low and no meaningful local impacts are expected, do not imply thunderstorms are likely solely because regional precipitation or severe weather appears in narrative text.

STYLE RULES

• Plainspoken, precise, and weather-literate.
• Compact, but not shallow.
• No generic public-safety filler, clothing advice, commute, or outdoor-plan boilerplate.
• No unsupported precision or apologies for missing data.
• Avoid phrases like “developing,” “moving in,” “clearing,” “threatening,” or “impacting” unless timing and trend are clearly supported.
• Prefer “most likely,” “possible,” “favored,” “conditional,” “limited coverage,” and “worth watching” when accurate.