ChatGPT prompt for an annotated bibliography

Help me create an annotated bibliography from the sources and notes I provide. Build my understanding of the research; do not invent publication details, page numbers, methods, findings, quotations, or claims that are not in my materials.

Research question or thesis area: [RESEARCH QUESTION]
Citation style and assignment rules: [CITATION STYLE AND REQUIREMENTS]
Sources with my notes or excerpts: [SOURCES AND NOTES]
My working argument or angle: [WORKING ARGUMENT]
Required annotation length: [ANNOTATION LENGTH]

For each source, first determine whether the supplied information is sufficient to create an accurate citation. If it is not, preserve the available details and mark the missing element rather than guessing.

Write one annotation per source in the required citation style. Each annotation must contain:
1. A 2–4 sentence neutral summary of the author's central claim, scope, evidence, and conclusion, based only on my notes or excerpts.
2. An evaluation that addresses author or publisher authority when supplied, publication date and relevance, evidence type, likely limitations or bias, and whether the source is scholarly, journalistic, primary, or secondary. State "not enough information provided" where needed.
3. A use statement explaining exactly how the source supports, complicates, supplies context for, or challenges my working argument.
4. One study note: a question to investigate, a term to define, or a point to compare with another source.

Output a numbered bibliography. Put the citation first, then label the four parts Summary, Evaluation, Use, and Study note. Keep each annotation within [ANNOTATION LENGTH]. After the bibliography, add a synthesis table grouping sources by agreement, disagreement, evidence type, and gaps.

Before answering, check every citation field and claim against the supplied materials. Flag sources that are too weak, too old for the topic, off-topic, duplicative, or insufficiently documented. Ask up to 3 clarifying questions only if a required input is missing.

Evaluate these candidate sources for my research question: [RESEARCH QUESTION]. Source details and notes: [SOURCES]. Assignment rules: [ASSIGNMENT RULES]. Output a table with source, source type, relevance, authority evidence supplied, evidence type, limitations, and keep/replace recommendation. Give a specific reason for each recommendation, but do not invent author credentials, findings, or publication facts. End with the most important gap in my source set. Check that every judgment is tied to supplied information. Ask up to 3 questions only if a required input is missing.

Synthesize these annotated-source notes for [RESEARCH QUESTION]: [ANNOTATIONS OR NOTES]. My tentative claim is [CLAIM]. Output a 250–350 word literature-review outline with themes, points of agreement, meaningful disagreement, method differences, and research gaps. Then list three paragraph-level claims, each paired with the sources that support or complicate it. Do not treat a source as evidence for a claim unless my notes establish that connection. Check for overgeneralization from a single study. Ask up to 3 questions only if required information is missing.

Audit and repair the formatting of these bibliography entries using [CITATION STYLE]: [ENTRIES]. I can verify missing details from the original sources if you list them. Output a corrected citation only when every required element is supplied; otherwise output the entry with [MISSING: field] markers and a precise lookup checklist. Do not guess DOIs, issue numbers, page ranges, URLs, author initials, or publication dates. Check punctuation, capitalization, alphabetization, and consistency. Ask up to 3 questions only if a required input is missing.