ChatGPT prompts for article analysis

Analyze the article below as an editor and subject-matter-aware SEO strategist. Focus on whether it gives a searcher a complete, trustworthy answer, not on keyword repetition.

[ARTICLE TEXT]
[TARGET KEYWORD]
[TARGET READER]
[SEARCH INTENT]
[BUSINESS OR EDITORIAL GOAL]

Return an analysis in these sections:
1. Search-intent verdict: identify the dominant intent (informational, commercial investigation, transactional, navigational, or mixed), the question the reader is trying to resolve, and whether the article satisfies it.
2. Argument and structure: summarize the central claim in 75 words or fewer, then outline each major section’s job. Identify missing decision steps, unsupported jumps, repetition, or sections that answer a different query.
3. Evidence audit: list every material factual claim, statistic, quotation, recommendation, or comparison. Classify it as supported in the article, needs a source, or is opinion. Do not fabricate sources.
4. Keyword coverage: list closely related subtopics, entities, definitions, comparisons, and follow-up questions that a qualified reader would expect. Separate necessary coverage from optional expansion; do not recommend irrelevant keyword variants.
5. Reader-value improvements: give a prioritized table with the issue, why it matters to [TARGET READER], and a specific revision instruction.
6. Revised outline: provide an H1 and 5-8 H2s, with 1-2 sentences explaining what each section must answer.

Before answering, check that recommendations follow [SEARCH INTENT] rather than a generic SEO checklist, and flag claims that cannot be verified from [ARTICLE TEXT]. Ask up to 3 clarifying questions only if a required input is missing.

Analyze this news article for accuracy signals, framing, and reader context.

[ARTICLE TEXT]
[TOPIC]
[INTENDED AUDIENCE]
[PUBLICATION STANDARD]

Return: a neutral 100-word summary; a claim-by-claim source audit; the primary sources quoted or missing; distinctions between reported fact, attribution, analysis, and prediction; important context absent from the story; and 5 precise editor questions. Do not use outside facts unless I provide sources, and do not infer motives. Check that the summary preserves uncertainty and that each concern points to exact wording in the article. Ask up to 3 questions only if required input is missing.

Review this financial article for analytical rigor and reader risk.

[ARTICLE TEXT]
[ASSET OR COMPANY]
[READER TYPE]
[AS-OF DATE]

Identify factual claims, valuation claims, forecasts, and investment opinions separately. For metrics, note the period, denominator, currency, and comparison baseline that are supplied or missing. Flag cherry-picked time windows, causal claims without evidence, undisclosed assumptions, and language that could be mistaken for personalized advice. Produce a revised outline for [READER TYPE]. Do not calculate or invent data. Check that every time-sensitive fact is tied to [AS-OF DATE] and every recommendation is labeled as analysis or opinion. Ask up to 3 questions only if inputs are missing.

Build an editorial brief for a new article.

[TARGET KEYWORD]
[RESEARCH NOTES]
[TARGET READER]
[UNIQUE EXPERTISE]

Provide the reader’s primary question, secondary questions in a logical order, search-intent assessment, article angle, H1, 6-9 H2s, evidence needed for each section, and claims that require primary sources. Include what not to cover because it would distract from the intent. Do not invent research, quotes, statistics, or product capabilities. Check that the outline has a clear decision path and that [UNIQUE EXPERTISE] contributes useful detail without unsupported claims. Ask up to 3 questions only if required input is missing.