"Someone should do that" is not a task

Meetings generate commitments—"Legal will review," "Sam to update the estimate," "Send client the revised timeline." Without capture, they live as fading memory and Slack pins. Sprint boards miss them; decision_inbox never sees them; next week the same topic returns.

AI extract meeting action items accelerates capture—but execution requires tasks in the system of record. WKFGo create_task via MCP (or UI) creates assigned work with project context, due dates, and audit trail after humans confirm each item.

Framework: from utterance to owned task

1. Extract candidates (AI)

From transcript or notes, AI lists:

Verb + deliverable ("Draft rollback plan")
Named owner if spoken
Implied deadline if mentioned
Related project if context clear

Mark confidence: explicit vs inferred—inferred items need facilitator confirmation.

2. Human review (required)

Facilitator checks:

Correct owner—don't assign to someone who was only mentioned
Right project and sprint boundary
Not duplicating existing work—smart_search first
Sensitive items routed correctly—not public task titles

3. create_task (system of record)

For each approved item, create_task with:

Title humans would say aloud
Assignee
Due date (even rough—better than none)
Link to meeting wiki page if publish_meeting_wiki ran

4. Close the loop

Next standup: list_tasks filtered by "created since steering" or tag. Unfinished items escalate—not re-debated from scratch.

Pair with meeting summarization

Best practice sequence:

Meeting ends
AI drafts summary + action list
publish_meeting_wiki for decisions narrative
create_task per confirmed action
Comment on tasks linking wiki slug for context

Decisions live in wiki; work lives on the board—both searchable via smart_search.

AI prompts for extraction

Via WKFGo MCP:

"From these notes, list action items with owner and due date—flag inferred owners."
"smart_search for 'rollback plan'—duplicate before create?"
"create_task on Project Atlas: title 'Legal review vendor DPA', assignee Maria, due Friday."

Require human "approve" step before bulk creates—especially client-facing commitments.

Anti-patterns

Auto create_task on every noun in transcript—noise floods board
Action items without assignee—orphans by definition
Creating tasks in personal todo while board stays empty
Skipping due dates because "we'll remember"

When to use decision_inbox instead

Some meeting outcomes are executive forks, not IC tasks—budget approval, release delay, vendor switch. Route those to add_decision_item / decision_inbox, not create_task.

Rule of thumb: if it needs a C-level choice, inbox; if it needs someone to do work, task.

Bulk extraction without board spam

For long steering calls, AI may propose twelve actions. Batch human triage:

Now — create_task this sprint
Later — backlog with date
Not a task — wiki decision only
Duplicate — link existing task ID from smart_search

Cap "Now" items per meeting—teams that create fifteen urgent tasks create zero accountability.

Verification loop in standup

Facilitator opens standup with: "Tasks created from Tuesday steering—status by ID?" list_tasks filtered by created date keeps meeting output honest. Items not mentioned twice consecutively get renegotiated or closed—not ignored.

Client-facing action items

External commitments need tighter review: legal phrasing, date feasibility, assignee authority. Never create_task client promises from AI alone—PM confirms against contract and capacity (workload_heatmap on assignee).

Closing the loop by Friday

Set a team norm: every action from Tuesday steering has a task ID by Wednesday standup. Facilitator reads IDs aloud once—culture beats tooling alone.

Slack vs system of record

Slack OK برای ping؛ create_task system of record. rule: اگر در Slack commit شد، bot/reminder «task ID؟» — AI can draft task from thread after human OK.

Action items without owners are wishes. When AI extracts bullets from notes, require name and due date before create_task. Review in standup: orphaned commitments from last week get assigned or explicitly dropped with log_decision so they do not reappear every retrospective.

Extract action items within one hour of meeting end while context is fresh. Tag each draft with meeting date and attendees in the wiki page before create_task so audit trails stay clear six months later.

Run a monthly audit: do AI answers cite task IDs from MCP? If not, tighten prompts to require citations before any stakeholder-facing draft leaves the team.

FAQ — AI meeting action items

Does create_task replace project managers?
No—it records commitments; PMs still prioritize and protect scope.

Can AI assign without asking?
Technically assign_task exists; best practice is confirmed assignee after review.

What about recurring meeting actions?
Use templates or automation rules where configured; still review first occurrence.

How do remote/async teams benefit?
Published wiki + tasks beat timezone-overlap meetings for accountability.

Try it now

Put these patterns on live project data—not slide decks.