Use lessons 01–03 or equivalent skills before this exercise. You can revisit them from the lesson list.
A browser and text editor. Supplied notes and drafts work offline. Optional live tools must be approved for the data.
Start with the idea
Write a procedure that handles missing inputs and exceptions.
Start with the supplied rule. Explain what happens when required information is missing. Mark suggested additions as proposals rather than established policy.
Exception path: The steps to follow when normal conditions are not met.
See the example and check your understanding
A made-up teaching example
Training requests need a course title and supervisor approval. Approved requests are logged; missing approval sends the request back. No payment is authorized. A new duplicate-handling rule needs review.
Ask yourself
Can a suggested improvement be presented as an existing approved rule?
Show the explanation
No. Label it proposed. Keep required confirmations, identity checks and unresolved problems visible.
Start with these checks
- Preserve the controlling rule.
- Include a stop or return path.
- Distinguish proposed changes from approved policy.
Use the different practice case below and check every requirement in its full instructions.
Full learning objectives
- Specify prerequisites and decision points.
- Include exceptions and human review.
- Test a procedure against adverse cases.
Captions appear here during playback.
Create procedures with exceptions and recovery
Write a procedure that handles missing inputs and exceptions.
Video playback is unavailable. Read the descriptive transcript below, go directly to practice, or open the video file.
Source-based teaching example · Fictional data · Reviewed 2026-10-03. Microsoft Mark · locally synthesized. On a small screen, use fullscreen for diagram details or read the transcript.
Read the descriptive transcript
0:00 · What you will learn
Write a procedure that handles missing inputs and exceptions.
What appears on screen
Write a procedure that handles missing inputs and exceptions.
0:06 · The idea
Start with the supplied rule. Explain what happens when required information is missing. Mark suggested additions as proposals rather than established policy.
What appears on screen
Start with the supplied rule. Explain what happens when required information is missing. Mark suggested additions as proposals rather than established policy.
0:19 · One useful term
Exception path. The steps to follow when normal conditions are not met.
What appears on screen
The steps to follow when normal conditions are not met.
0:27 · A worked example · 1
Training requests need a course title and supervisor approval. Approved requests are logged; missing approval sends the request back. No payment is authorized.
What appears on screen
Training requests need a course title and supervisor approval. Approved requests are logged; missing approval sends the request back. No payment is authorized.
0:41 · A worked example · 2
A new duplicate-handling rule needs review.
What appears on screen
A new duplicate-handling rule needs review.
0:46 · Your turn to think
Can a suggested improvement be presented as an existing approved rule? Pause and decide before continuing.
What appears on screen
Can a suggested improvement be presented as an existing approved rule? Pause the video if you need more time.
1:04 · Why this answer works
No. Label it proposed. Keep required confirmations, identity checks and unresolved problems visible.
What appears on screen
No. Label it proposed. Keep required confirmations, identity checks and unresolved problems visible.
1:15 · Check 1
Preserve the controlling rule.
What appears on screen
Preserve the controlling rule.
1:20 · Check 2
Include a stop or return path.
What appears on screen
Include a stop or return path.
1:25 · Check 3
Distinguish proposed changes from approved policy.
What appears on screen
Distinguish proposed changes from approved policy.
1:31 · Now try a different case
Open the lesson and try its different practice case. Use every check in the full task. Watching alone does not mark the lesson complete.
What appears on screen
Open the lesson Try the new case Check and revise The full task and its requirements are in the linked lesson.
Watching explains the example. Complete the lesson practice to check what you can do. Explore all visual lessons →
The method
A useful procedure explains who does what, with which inputs, and how success is checked. Separate known rules from proposed improvements. Ask AI for a first draft from supplied requirements, then walk through normal, missing-input, duplicate and interrupted cases. Do not allow it to invent organizational policy to complete the document.
Place exceptions where the operator needs them. Identify escalation ownership, recovery and what must not happen automatically. A checklist should be understandable without an assistant. Record the source and version of each rule so changes can be reviewed. Where a real rule is absent, label the item as a proposal needing responsible approval.
Choose your model, harness and offline route
Text-only assistant
Use supplied text. Ask for a plan or draft; do not claim browsing, code execution or file access that was unavailable.
Tool-enabled application or harness
Record which tools actually run, allowed files and actions, approval boundaries and observable results. Tools are optional unless the task needs them.
Local or cloud deployment
Inspect inference, retrieval, connectors, logs and storage separately. Use only authorized environments for real data; training fixtures are fictional.
Higher-capability or frontier model
Evaluate the exact task and configuration. Capability does not supply missing evidence or grant permission. No provider ranking or guarantee is implied.
Offline alternative
Use the supplied inputs and inspect the worked example manually. Builder exercises use local deterministic Python. No paid account or live model call is required.
Record the exact product/model label when available, tools actually used, inputs, permitted actions, observed output and checks. Live accounts or APIs may have external costs; they are optional and are not used by this page.
Read the general workflow guide →Worked example
Supplied input
Fictional rule: training requests need a course title and supervisor approval. Coordinator logs approved requests. Missing approvals return to requester. No payment is authorized.
A checked result
Procedure: check title and approval; return incomplete requests; log approved requests once; stop before any purchase. Duplicate handling is a proposed addition requiring review, not an existing rule.
Why this works
A clear draft preserves the rule and distinguishes a suggested control from approved policy.
Try a different case
Independent rules: equipment loan requires item ID and custodian confirmation. Missing confirmation means no release. Returned items need condition notes. Draft a procedure; test absent ID, missing confirmation and damaged return.
Download this task and checklist →Interactive practice / Fictional fixture
Walk through the procedure’s exceptions
Use the supplied independent case above. Check the bounded decisions, then review your written artifact against the full acceptance criteria.
Everything runs in this browser. No AI model is called and no work is uploaded. Bounded checks cover specific facts and rules. Your writing is not graded: you review it yourself. Practice never marks a lesson complete automatically.
Cover absent ID, missing confirmation and damage. Label added escalation steps as proposals.
Try the task, run the checks, then revise. Checks are teaching feedback, not an instructor grade.
Observed browser simulation
This trace comes from the bounded local checker. It is not a Python run, model result or production tool execution.
Keep or restore your work
Drafts are not saved automatically. Save only fictional practice data. A browser draft may be lost if storage is cleared; download a copy to keep it.
Your steps
- Map inputs, decision points, outputs and reviewer.
- Run the three cases on paper and record what happens.
- Label any new proposal and include a recovery step.
Check your work
- No release without confirmation.
- Item identity is checked before release.
- Damage remains recorded and unresolved until reviewed.
After your attempt: review notes and a common mistake
“Auto-release if the custodian is slow” violates the rule. A stop-and-escalate proposal can be useful but must not be represented as an already approved exception.
Different wording or a different justified decision can pass. Check your work against every requirement; these notes are not an automated grade.
Explain your approach
Where could your procedure cause an irreversible action?
Keep your artifact, one correction or decision, its evidence and one remaining limitation. Nothing on this page sends or uploads your work.
Check your understanding
Choose an answer to see feedback. This is a knowledge check, not instructor assessment.
Review your independent practice
Complete the supplied task before recording progress. Use the acceptance criteria and reveal the review notes after your attempt. Keep your artifact yourself; nothing is uploaded.
Not yet self-reviewed. Completion stays in this browser and does not issue a badge.
Optional deeper study
Explore the related general-course lesson → This opens the existing canonical lesson; it is optional depth, not another copy of this focused task.
Primary references
Revision 2026-10-03. Fictional examples, not observed provider results. Knowledge checks and completion records are self-study aids.