What is the test for giving the jury the wrong information on the elements of CALCRIM No. 703?

Accordingly, even if we assume that the trial court erred in failing to give CALCRIM No. 703, any error was not prejudicial and was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. " 'We have consistently held that when a trial court fails to instruct the jury on an element of a special circumstance allegation, the prejudicial effect of the error must be measured under the test set forth in Chapman v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 18, 24.' " (Mil, supra, 53 Cal.4th at p. 409.) Any failure to instruct on the elements of being a major participant and acting with reckless indifference was harmless because those elements are required only when a jury finds that a defendant was not the actual killer.