Give it a real complication, not just a scenario. “A patient presents with chest pain” is a premise; “a patient presents with chest pain, but their described symptoms and their vital signs point in different directions” is a case worth discussing. The more specific the tension or ambiguity you ask for in your additional context, the better the discussion questions that come back.
Match question difficulty to how you’ll actually use the case. If you plan to open a seminar with it, the early, more descriptive questions matter most; if it’s the centrepiece of a 90-minute session, the harder analytical questions at the end are where the real work happens — read all of them before class and decide which ones you’ll actually use, rather than working through every one in order by default.
Read the teaching notes before you need them, not during class. They’re written to support you in facilitating the harder questions, including likely misconceptions students raise — worth a read-through the day before, not a first read live in the room.
Treat regeneration as a reset, not a tweak. Because regenerating a case study can produce an entirely new scenario and title (not just a revised version of the same one), it’s best used when you want to start over, not when you just want to adjust one detail — a small fix is often faster to make by hand in the generated text.
Pair it deliberately with a Lesson Plan or Assessment when it adds real value. The links from those tools pre-fills context to keep the case study on-theme, but it’s still worth asking whether a case study genuinely serves the session’s outcomes before generating one just because the option is there.