# Research Prompt: Build a Source-Evaluation Table > A reusable research prompt that turns a list of URLs into a Markdown table of date, author, method and missing details, without browsing. ## Install Copy the content below into your project: # Research Prompt: Build a Source-Evaluation Table A reusable research prompt that turns a list of URLs into a Markdown table of date, author, method and missing details, without browsing. ## Start here Paste your source list into any ordinary AI chat that accepts text, then paste the prompt below as your instruction. No terminal, account or API setup is needed. **What to paste:** a numbered list of URLs and, when you know them, the title and site name for each. Example line: `1. https://example.com/article1 (Title: 'The Future of Remote Work', Site: TechDaily)` **Where to paste it:** in the same chat message as the prompt, right after the line that asks you for your sources. **How to check the output:** the reply should be a Markdown table with the columns Source, Publication Date, Author/Org, Stated Method and Missing Info, followed by a short summary and a flag for opinion-style pieces. Every cell should trace back to text you supplied; unavailable fields should read `Not provided`, and unclear ones `Unclear`. ## What this prompt does It asks the assistant to build a source-evaluation table from material you provide. For each source it records publication date, author or organization, the stated research method, and what is missing. It then summarises which sources are most transparent and flags pieces whose method is not described. The prompt relies only on the text you paste. It explicitly tells the assistant not to browse or fetch links, so treat the table as a structured reading of your own notes rather than a verification of the sources themselves. ## Prerequisites and permissions - A plain AI chat that accepts pasted text. Nothing else is required. - You supply the source list; the assistant reads only what is in the conversation. - Because no browsing happens, the assistant cannot confirm dates, authors or methods on its own, and it must not invent them. ## Limitations - Output quality depends entirely on the detail in your list. A URL alone usually yields several `Not provided` cells. - The assistant does not open links, so it cannot detect paywalls, changed pages or removed articles. - `Unclear` means the supplied text was ambiguous, not that the source is unreliable. - Do not paste private or confidential material. Anything in the chat is handled under that service's own terms, not this prompt. ## Checking the result Read the table row by row against your list: every source should appear once, and no reason should appear that you did not supply. The fictional example in the prompt (Article 1, Article 2) is illustrative only and is not a test result. ## FAQ **Can it fill in a date or author I did not provide?** No. The instruction is to write `Not provided` rather than guess, so an empty cell is expected behaviour. **Does it open my links or check if they still work?** No. It works only from the pasted text and performs no external actions. ## Verification note Source reviewed; runtime not tested. ## Source and thanks Original TokRepo prompt, licensed CC BY 4.0. Reference context: [ChatGPT release notes](), reviewed 2026-10-04. ## Complete reusable prompt You are a research assistant helping evaluate sources. Your task is to create a source-evaluation table for the links I provide. I will give you a list of URLs or source descriptions (title, site name). For each source, extract or infer the following fields: publication date (if available), author or organization, stated research method (e.g., survey, experiment, case study, opinion), and a brief note on any missing information. If a field is not available from the material I provide, write 'Not provided'. Do not invent details. After filling the table, add a short summary of which sources are most transparent and which lack key details. Also, flag any source that appears to be an opinion piece without a described method. Before we begin, here is a fictional example: INPUT EXAMPLE: 1. https://example.com/article1 (Title: 'The Future of Remote Work', Site: TechDaily) 2. https://example.com/article2 (Title: 'Study: Remote Work Increases Productivity', Site: Journal of Management) OUTPUT SHAPE (example): | Source | Publication Date | Author/Org | Stated Method | Missing Info | |--------|------------------|------------|---------------|--------------| | Article 1 | Not provided | Not provided | Not provided | Date, author, method | | Article 2 | 2023-05 | Dr. Smith | Survey of 500 employees | None | SUMMARY: Article 2 provides clear methodology and authorship; Article 1 lacks transparency and may be opinion-based. Now, please provide the list of sources you want evaluated. I will output the table in Markdown format. Ensure the output uses only the information I supply; if a source is inaccessible or ambiguous, note it as 'Unclear'. Review the table for consistency and completeness before sharing. Do not perform any external actions such as browsing or fetching links; rely solely on the provided text. ## References and reuse - [ChatGPT release notes](https://help.openai.com/en/articles/6825453-chatgpt-release-notes) · Reviewed 2026-10-04 Original TokRepo prompt · [CC BY 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Reference documents retain their own rights. --- # 研究提示词：为来源链接生成来源评估表 一段可复用的研究提示词，把给出的链接列表整理成包含日期、作者、方法与缺失信息的 Markdown 表格，且不进行联网浏览。 ## 开始使用 把来源列表粘贴到任意一个能接收文本的普通 AI 聊天中，然后把下面的提示词作为指令粘贴进去。无需终端、账号或 API 配置。 **粘贴什么：** 一份带编号的链接列表，如果知道的话，再写上每条链接的标题和站点名称。示例行：`1. https://example.com/article1 (Title: 'The Future of Remote Work', Site: TechDaily)` **粘贴到哪里：** 和提示词写在同一条消息里，紧跟在向你索要来源列表的那句话之后。 **如何检查输出：** 回复应当是一张 Markdown 表格，列为 Source、Publication Date、Author/Org、Stated Method、Missing Info，后面附一段简短总结，并对评论类文章做出标记。每个单元格都应能追溯到你自己提供的文字；缺失字段应写为 `Not provided`，含糊不清的写为 `Unclear`。 ## 这段提示词的作用 它让助手根据你提供的材料生成一张来源评估表。每条来源记录发布日期、作者或机构、所述研究方法以及缺失的信息。随后它会总结哪些来源最透明，并标出未说明方法的文章。 提示词只依赖你粘贴的文字，并明确要求助手不要浏览或抓取链接，因此请把表格视为对自己笔记的结构化整理，而不是对来源本身的核实。 ## 前提与权限 - 一个能接收粘贴文本的普通 AI 聊天即可，不需要其他工具。 - 来源列表由你提供，助手只读取对话中的内容。 - 由于不进行浏览，助手无法自行确认日期、作者或方法，也不得凭空编造。 ## 局限 - 输出质量完全取决于你列表中的信息量。只给一个链接，通常会得到多个 `Not provided`。 - 助手不会打开链接，因此无法发现付费墙、页面改版或文章被删除。 - `Unclear` 表示你提供的文字含糊，并不代表来源不可靠。 - 不要粘贴私密或机密材料。对话内容按该服务自身的条款处理，而不是按这段提示词。 ## 检查结果 把表格逐行与你的列表对照：每条来源都应出现一次，且不应出现你没有提供过的理由。提示词中的虚构示例（Article 1、Article 2）仅作说明，并不是测试结果。 ## 常见问题 **我没有提供的日期或作者，它会自己补上吗？** 不会。指令要求写 `Not provided` 而不是猜测，所以空单元格属于正常行为。 **它会打开我的链接、检查是否还能访问吗？** 不会。它只根据粘贴的文字工作，不执行任何外部操作。 ## 核实说明 来源已审阅；运行时未测试。 ## 来源与致谢 原创 TokRepo 提示词，采用 CC BY 4.0 许可。参考背景：[ChatGPT release notes]()，审阅于 2026-10-04。 ## 完整可复制提示词 你是一名协助评估来源的研究助理。你的任务是为我提供的链接创建一张来源评估表。我会给你一份 URL 或来源描述（标题、站点名称）的列表。对于每条来源，提取或推断以下字段：发布日期（如有）、作者或机构、所述研究方法（例如调查、实验、案例研究、评论），以及关于任何缺失信息的简短说明。如果某个字段无法从我所提供的材料中获得，写“Not provided”。不要编造细节。填完表格后，添加一段简短总结，说明哪些来源最透明、哪些缺少关键细节。同时，标出任何看起来是没有所述方法的评论文章的来源。开始之前，这里有一个虚构示例： 输入示例： 1. https://example.com/article1 (Title: 'The Future of Remote Work', Site: TechDaily) 2. https://example.com/article2 (Title: 'Study: Remote Work Increases Productivity', Site: Journal of Management) 输出形式（示例）： | Source | Publication Date | Author/Org | Stated Method | Missing Info | |--------|------------------|------------|---------------|--------------| | Article 1 | Not provided | Not provided | Not provided | Date, author, method | | Article 2 | 2023-05 | Dr. Smith | Survey of 500 employees | None | 总结：Article 2 提供了清晰的方法论和作者信息；Article 1 缺乏透明度，可能是基于观点的。 现在，请提供你希望评估的来源列表。我将以 Markdown 格式输出表格。确保输出只使用我提供的信息；如果某条来源无法访问或含糊不清，注明为“Unclear”。在分享之前，请检查表格的一致性和完整性。不要执行任何诸如浏览或抓取链接的外部操作；仅依赖所提供的文字。 ## 参考资料与复用 - [ChatGPT release notes](https://help.openai.com/en/articles/6825453-chatgpt-release-notes) · Reviewed 2026-10-04 TokRepo 原创提示词 · [CC BY 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)。参考资料保留各自原有权利。 --- Source: https://tokrepo.com/en/workflows/research-prompt-build-source-evaluation-table-3579e4d6 Author: Prompt Lab