Prompt library
Copy-paste prompts for Multilo, grouped by task and role — from exploring your sources to drafting, citing, reviewing, and getting ready to submit.
Copy-paste prompts for everyday research writing in Multilo, grouped by task and by role. Each one works in chat with your project open. For step-by-step walkthroughs, see Common workflows.
How to use this library
- Find a prompt for your task — browse the sections below, or press ⌘K (Ctrl+K on Windows) to search the docs.
- Click Copy on the prompt box and paste it into chat.
- Replace anything in [square brackets] with your own details — a section name, a word count, a file, a citation style.
- Select the text you mean before you send, or @-mention the file, so the agent works on the right part.
Prompts are starting points
You don’t need the exact wording. Change a prompt to fit your project, then refine the result with a follow-up — that is how most good results happen. See Getting better results.Find prompts by role
| If you are… | Start with |
|---|---|
| A student writing essays, lab reports, or a dissertation | Start here, Draft, Revise and polish |
| A PhD candidate with a long thesis and hundreds of references | Explore your sources, Plan and outline, Cite and verify |
| A researcher drafting articles, proposals, and reviews | Data, figures, and media, Review and critique, Prepare to submit |
| A supervisor reviewing other people’s drafts | Review and critique, Cite and verify |
Start here
New to Multilo? Try these five in order on a real project. Together they cover the core loop: understand your sources, plan, write, polish, and check.
Give me an overview of the papers in my library: the main question, method, and finding of each, in one line per paper.A broad first question shows you what the agent can see, and what is missing from your library.
Find where my sources discuss [response bias in online surveys], and quote the key sentence from each.Asking for the quote makes the agent point at real text you can check, not a summary from memory.
Outline a [Related Work] section from the sources in my library, organized by theme. Don't write it yet.Reviewing an outline is much faster than rewriting a whole section that went in the wrong direction.
Tighten this paragraph to about [100] words. Keep the main claim and every citation, and don't add anything new.A target length plus clear limits gives a focused edit instead of a rewrite.
List every claim in this section that doesn't have a citation, and suggest a source from my library for each one.Unsupported claims are the easiest problem to miss in your own writing. Follow up with Claim Check.
Explore your sources
Where do the papers in my library disagree, and what evidence does each side use?Disagreements are where a literature review earns its keep.
Explain [construct validity] as it is used in [@smith-2021.pdf], in plain language, with one example.Mentioning the paper ties the explanation to how that author uses the term.
Make a glossary of the key terms in my library, with a one-sentence definition and the paper each definition comes from.A shared glossary keeps your terminology consistent across chapters.
Compare the methods and findings of [@smith-2021.pdf] and [@lee-2023.pdf]. Where do they agree, and why might they differ?A side-by-side comparison often becomes a paragraph of your review.
Plan and outline
Which topics in my draft aren't covered by any source in my library?Run this before drafting, then fill the gaps with Sources Hub.
Turn my notes in [@notes.md] into an outline for the [Introduction], with the sources from my library that support each point.Your notes stay the plan; the agent only gives them structure.
Propose how to restructure [chapter 2] so the argument builds step by step. Don't change anything yet.“Don’t change anything yet” keeps big changes reviewable before they touch your document.
Outline a literature review on [remote-work productivity] from my library. Group the sources by theme and note where they disagree.Grouping by theme, not by paper, is what makes a review read well.
Draft
Draft the [Related Work] section from that outline, about [600] words, citing sources from my library.An outline you have already approved plus a length keeps the draft on target.
Write a first draft of the [Discussion] from the files in [@results] and the sources in my library.The agent reads your actual results, so the numbers come from your data. See files & folders.
Continue this section for about [two paragraphs], keeping the same argument and citing as you go.Useful when you know where the section is going but are stuck.
/draft [a 3,000-word literature review on remote-work productivity, organized by theme]Starts the Full Draft Writer, which plans an outline and drafts section by section with citations.
Revise and polish
Which three paragraphs in this section are weakest, and why? Don't rewrite them yet.Diagnosis first lets you decide which fixes are worth making.
Improve the transitions between paragraphs in this section. Don't add new claims or change any citation.Clear limits stop a flow edit from turning into a rewrite.
This reads as machine-written. Rewrite it in my voice, keeping every claim and citation.Works best once Multilo has learned your voice in voice.md.
Rewrite this section for a general audience. Keep every claim and citation, and explain any technical term the first time it appears.Handy for public summaries, grant lay summaries, and blog posts.
Cite and verify
Reformat every in-text citation in this document to [APA], and flag any that don't match a source in my library.Multilo handles APA, IEEE, Harvard, MLA, and Chicago. See citations & bibliography.
Make the reference list match exactly what I cite in the text: remove anything I don't cite and add anything that's missing.A reference list that drifted from the text is a common review comment.
Does [Smith, 2021] really support what I claim in [paragraph 3]? Quote the passage that supports it, or tell me it doesn't.For every citation at once, run Claim Check.
Use only sources from my library. If a claim can't be supported, say so instead of guessing.To make this the rule for every request, turn on strict integrity mode.
Review and critique
Review the methodology section for sample size, controls, and how the statistics are reported. List problems before suggesting fixes.Use a flagship model for critique — see choosing a model.
What would a skeptical reviewer say about this argument? Give the three strongest objections and how I could answer each.Answering objections before a reviewer raises them makes a paper stronger.
Give me feedback on this chapter as a supervisor would: what works, what's missing, and three concrete fixes in order of importance.Run it in a fresh chat, so the review isn’t shaped by the conversation that wrote the chapter.
Check that this paper has a clear research question, and that every section links back to it. Point out any section that doesn't.A thread that runs through every section is what reviewers look for first.
Data, figures, and media
Make a [bar chart] of [results/scores.csv] and describe what it shows in two sentences.The agent writes and runs code to make the chart. See tools & Agent Compute.
Pull the tables out of [@paper.pdf] into a spreadsheet, one sheet per table.Saves retyping numbers by hand, and the errors that come with it.
What does this figure show? Write a one-paragraph caption for my [Results] section.Attach the image to your message first. See media & images.
Transcribe [interview-03.m4a] and list the main themes, with a short quote for each.Transcription runs on your computer.
Prepare to submit
Write a [250]-word abstract for this paper covering background, method, results, and conclusion. Use only what the paper actually says.Writing the abstract last, from the finished paper, keeps it accurate.
Reformat all citations and the reference list from [APA] to [IEEE] for submission.In-text markers and the reference list change together.
Translate this abstract into [Spanish]. Keep technical terms precise, and list any term you weren't sure how to translate.The list of unsure terms tells you exactly what to check.
Draft a short cover letter to the editor of [journal name] explaining what this paper contributes and why it fits the journal.When you are ready, save back to Word (.docx) with formatting intact.
Steer the agent
Short follow-ups that change direction mid-task, without starting over.
Stop. Show me the outline you're working from before you continue.Don't change anything yet. Tell me what you would change and why.That's not quite right: [what's wrong]. Try again, and this time [what you want instead].Only work on [section 3]. Leave the rest of the document as it is.Make it stick
If you type the same instruction again and again, save it once instead.
Remember that this project uses [British spelling] and [APA] style.Saved as a note in agent memory and recalled in later chats.
# Project rules
- Use British spelling and APA style.
- Call participants "respondents", never "subjects".
- Keep paragraphs under 150 words.Rules in AGENTS.md apply to chat and every agent in the project.
/createagent a "Methods reviewer" that checks a paper's methodology section for sample-size, controls, and stats reportingThe new agent appears in the Agents Library with a YOURS chip. See custom agents.