Learner
Give it a link to an article and get a prompt that makes an AI produce not a summary but material you can learn from. No API key, no subscription: the prompt works in any chat.
Build the prompt
The prompt goes to your clipboard and the chat opens in a new tab. All that is left is to paste it — Ctrl+V, or ⌘+V on a Mac.
You need a model that can open links. If the chat says it cannot reach the page, ask it to turn on web search, or paste the text of the article in a message.
Next — in the same chat
The analysis is only the start. Understanding shows up in the next two steps, and both have to be done by hand rather than read.
Check your answers
The analysis will contain five questions without answers. Answer them yourself — out loud or in writing, without looking back at the article. Only then send this prompt.
Test your explanation
Explain the topic in plain words, as if you were telling someone with no background. Send this prompt, then your explanation. The AI will look for holes in it instead of praising it.
Why not a summary
Asking an AI for a recap is easy and pleasant, and it adds nothing to your understanding. A clear explanation creates the feeling of understanding — and the difference shows up on the first real task. So the prompt is built to make you work rather than read.
A map of the text
Structure, key concepts and the links between them — before you read. You can see which three or four sections you actually need and which you can skip. The prompt also demands that the model name the author and their interest: a vendor text reads differently.
Claims with what they rest on
Every claim the author makes is written out together with what holds it up: data, logic, personal experience or nothing. That one line exposes more than the rest of the analysis combined.
Five questions without answers
Re-reading barely works — trying to recall does. So the answers are not handed over straight away: you go back for them in a separate step, after answering yourself.
Ten cards
The same half hour spread across a week beats an hour and a half in one sitting. The cards are short — a long answer on the back is not something you remember.
Who disagrees
Every methodology has critics, and it is usually the critics who have written down where it breaks. The prompt demands strong objections rather than straw men, and forbids inventing opponents who do not exist.
A task for practice
One concrete 30–60 minute task with a completion criterion and a prediction of what will turn out to be harder than the article makes it look. The gap between "that's clear" and "I've got it" only opens up here.
What this tool does not do
It does not read the article for you
The article is opened by the model in your chat, not by this site. All that happens here is the text of the prompt being assembled — nothing is sent anywhere and your link is not stored.
It does not fully stop invention
The prompt has a dedicated "facts only" block and a requirement to mark anything the model adds itself. That lowers the risk without removing the need to check: verify numbers and source titles against the original.
It does not replace practice
No analysis produces understanding without an attempt to apply it. The last block of the prompt exists for exactly that, and skipping it means you have spent your time on pleasant reading.