diff --git a/.github/prompts/article-freshness-review.prompt.md b/.github/prompts/article-freshness-review.prompt.md
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..003c0e95011e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.github/prompts/article-freshness-review.prompt.md
@@ -0,0 +1,144 @@
+---
+author: tdykstra
+description: >
+  Generates a freshness review report for an ASP.NET Core doc article.
+  Usage: Open a GitHub issue, open Copilot Chat, and paste:
+  "Read and follow all instructions in .github/prompts/article-freshness-review.prompt.md.
+  Use this issue as context. Generate the freshness review report."
+  Then copy the report into the issue discussion. Does NOT create a PR.
+ms.author: wpickett
+ms.date: 03/24/2026
+---
+
+# ASP.NET Core Article Freshness Review
+
+> **Usage**: Attach this prompt file in Copilot Chat, then type the article URL
+> (e.g., `Review https://learn.microsoft.com/aspnet/core/web-api/action-return-types`).
+> Paste the resulting report into the GitHub issue discussion.
+> **This prompt does NOT create a PR or modify any files.**
+
+## Instructions
+
+You are reviewing an ASP.NET Core documentation article for freshness and accuracy.
+
+### Step 1: Load Context
+
+Read the repository's copilot instruction file for conventions and rules:
+[copilot-instructions.md](../copilot-instructions.md)
+
+And read the dotnet/docs repository editing instructions:
+https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dotnet/docs/refs/heads/main/.github/agents/docseditor.agent.md
+
+### Step 2: Review the Article
+
+Review the article provided by the user.
+
+Evaluate it against ALL of the following criteria:
+
+**A. Moniker Range & Versioning**
+* Are there newer APIs, packages, or approaches that supersede what the article describes?
+* If so: Is the monikerRange in the frontmatter still appropriate?
+* If the article covers a version that is no longer the latest, does it include guidance directing readers to the current version's documentation?
+
+**B. Frontmatter & Metadata**
+* Is ms.date in MM/DD/YYYY format?
+* If ms.date is older than 6 months, flag it as a Minor metadata-only update.
+  An old ms.date does NOT by itself indicate the article content is stale — the
+  content may still be accurate and current. Classify a stale ms.date as Minor
+  severity. It must never contribute to a "Needs Updating" verdict on its own.
+* Is the title field listed first, with remaining fields in alphabetical order?
+* Are all required metadata fields present? (Check only for presence, not for 
+  cross-field value consistency. For example: The `author` and `ms.author` fields are 
+  independent and are not required to match.)
+
+**C. Content Accuracy**
+* Are code samples correct for the targeted framework version(s)?
+* Are NuGet package names and namespaces still valid?
+* Are referenced APIs still available and not deprecated in the targeted version?
+* Do xref links (xref:) resolve to valid UIDs?
+
+**D. Style & Conventions (per copilot-instructions.md)**
+* Placeholders in code/commands use {UPPER CASE WITH SPACES} format with descriptions in surrounding text.
+* Section headers do NOT end with periods.
+* Bullet markers use * (not -).
+* Links follow the documented conventions (relative for MS Learn, full URL for external).
+* Code blocks use :::code snippet references where appropriate.
+
+**E. External Links**
+* Are external URLs likely still valid? (Flag any that point to known-sunset services or archived repos.)
+
+### Step 3: Produce the Report
+
+Output a single Markdown report with this EXACT structure:
+
+```
+# Freshness Review Report
+
+**File:** `{FILE PATH}`
+**Repository:** `dotnet/AspNetCore.Docs`
+**Reviewed:** {REVIEW DATE}
+**Reviewer:** @{REVIEWER}
+**Article URL:** {ARTICLE URL}
+**Source URL:** {SOURCE URL}
+
+---
+
+## Verdict: **{Needs Updating | Current — No Changes Needed}**
+
+A verdict of "Needs Updating" requires at least one Critical or Moderate issue.
+
+---
+
+## Critical Issues
+
+{Issues that affect correctness, reader confusion, or discoverability.
+Each issue should include:
+- **Issue title**
+- **Location:** file path and line number(s)
+- **Current content:** (quoted)
+- **Recommended fix:** (exact replacement text)
+- **Rationale:** why this matters}
+
+## Moderate Issues
+
+{Issues that affect style compliance or minor accuracy.
+Same sub-structure as Critical.}
+
+## Minor Issues
+
+{Cosmetic or convention-based issues.
+Same sub-structure as Critical.}
+
+---
+
+## Copilot Feasibility Assessment
+
+**Can Copilot handle this freshness update?** {Yes | Likely | Partial | No}
+
+**Justification:**
+{Explain why Copilot can or cannot be expected to handle the full update
+correctly with minimal PR review corrections. Consider:
+* Are the changes primarily mechanical (metadata, formatting, link fixes)?
+* Do any changes require deep domain knowledge of ASP.NET Core APIs or architecture?
+* Are there judgment calls about content restructuring or technical accuracy?
+* Would the update require testing code samples against a running application?}
+
+**Recommendation:**
+{One of:
+* "Assign to Copilot" — Changes are mechanical and well-defined
+* "Assign to Copilot with human review of [specific areas]" — Mostly mechanical but some areas need expert judgment
+* "Assign to a human author" — Changes require domain expertise, significant rewriting, or code verification that Copilot cannot reliably perform}
+
+## Summary of Recommended Changes
+
+{A numbered checklist of ALL changes, in order of priority, that can be
+used directly as a task list for the PR author.}
+```
+
+## Rules
+
+* Do NOT invent issues. If something is correct, say so.
+* Do NOT suggest changes outside the scope of the copilot-instructions.md rules and current ASP.NET Core documentation standards.
+* If recommending a NOTE or callout, provide the EXACT Markdown to insert including moniker-range fencing if applicable.
+* Flag the issue title if it doesn't match the actual file name or path.
+* Every recommended change must include the exact "before" and "after" text.