The prompt
Copy it whole, replace every bracketed variable, then paste it as your first message.
You are helping me structure one piece. I have already chosen the angle; do not reopen it. Do not draft prose. I direct, you propose, I judge. ## 1. The piece - Angle, fixed: [THE ANGLE] - Reader: [WHO WILL READ IT] - Format and length: [FORMAT AND LENGTH] - It must: [WHAT THE PIECE MUST DO] - Already decided: [ALREADY DECIDED] ## 2. Raw notes (the only source of material) [RAW NOTES] ## 3. What I want back Two outlines that make clearly different structural bets. Label each at the top with its tradeoff in one line, for example "Leads with the number; risks reading like a report" or "Leads with the story; slower to reach the point." In each outline, every section has four parts: - Point: the one claim this section makes, written as a sentence, not a heading. - Evidence: the lines from my notes it uses, quoted or referenced. If the notes contain nothing for this section, write [VERIFY: what is missing] instead of inventing something. - Reader state: a phrase for what the reader should think or feel by the end of the section. - Share: a rough fraction of the total length. ## 4. Rules - Build only from the notes. No added examples, statistics, quotes, studies, or background. Gaps get a [VERIFY] marker, not filler. - Do not change the angle. If the notes do not support it, say so in one line at the top, then outline it anyway. - No introduction section that previews the piece and no conclusion section that repeats it, unless the format demands one. - Use the number of sections the material needs. Do not pad to a template. - Respect everything under "already decided". - Never say you have checked or verified anything. You have not. ## 5. After both outlines - One line listing which of my notes neither outline used, so I can decide whether they belong. - Then stop. No recommendation, no summary, no draft.
- Best for
- A chosen angle and a page or more of notes that have not found their order
- Pieces where the structure is a genuine decision: lead with the number or the story, chronology or argument
- Writers who outline in their heads and lose track of which sections are backed by material and which are hopes
- Any nonfiction long enough to have sections: posts, essays, talks, reports, longer newsletter issues
- Not for
- Finding the angle. If you cannot write the claim in one sentence, go back a stage. This prompt will outline whatever you give it, including a muddle
- Short pieces with one move, such as an email or a social post. Structure is not the problem there
- Fiction with a plot to work out. The questions are different, and the Short Story mega prompt asks them
An outline from an assistant usually looks like this: Introduction, Background, Three Key Points, Conclusion. It is a template with your topic poured into the slots. It tells you nothing about what the piece argues, and it quietly promises material you do not have, because every slot gets filled whether or not your notes can fill it.
A useful outline is a list of points, not headings. Each section says the one thing it claims, points at the lines in your notes that back it, and admits where the notes run out. Built that way, the outline is also an honest inventory: before you draft a word, you can see which sections are yours and which are wishes.
This prompt asks for two outlines that make different structural bets, each labeled by its tradeoff, so you are choosing between real options rather than approving the first thing you saw. It does not reopen the angle, it does not draft prose, and it ends by listing which of your notes neither outline used. That last line is often where the better piece was hiding.
Variables
What to put in each bracket. Required ones are marked. Thin answers here are the usual cause of generic output.
[THE ANGLE]RequiredThe one-sentence claim you chose in the discover stage. It is fixed for this prompt.
ExampleBedside handover made our shifts shorter and our patients safer, and the privacy complaints were worth it
[WHO WILL READ IT]RequiredThe reader, including how they will read and what they are inclined to resist.
ExampleNurses and charge nurses on other units, reading the internal newsletter on a break, skeptical of anything that sounds like a management initiative
[FORMAT AND LENGTH]Format, venue, and a length target.
ExampleAbout 1,200 words for the hospital's internal nursing newsletter
[WHAT THE PIECE MUST DO]RequiredThe change you want in the reader.
ExampleMake a charge nurse on another unit willing to try bedside handover for one month
[ALREADY DECIDED]Anything fixed before structure: things that must appear, things that must not, framing you have settled. Your accepted-decisions ledger so far.
ExampleMust include the near-miss story. Must not name the patient or the nurse involved. Do not frame it as hospital policy; it was our unit's choice
[RAW NOTES]RequiredEverything the piece may draw on, pasted as it is. The outline can only cite what is here.
ExampleHandover averaged 38 minutes before and 22 minutes after eight weeks; two privacy complaints in month one; one near-miss caught when a patient corrected the medication list during handover; staff survey: 14 of 19 preferred it after eight weeks, 3 did not, 2 did not answer; a line that says 'the unit upstairs tried this and stopped, nobody knows why'
Why it is built this way
Each block does one job. Knowing the job lets you shorten or adapt the prompt without breaking it.
'Angle, fixed' in block 1
The handoff from the discover stage. Without the word 'fixed', the assistant treats the angle as a suggestion and proposes a broader, safer piece, usually without saying so.
Block 2 as the only source of material
The same lever the mega prompt uses, applied to structure. A ban on filler forces [VERIFY] markers into the outline, and a section full of markers tells you before drafting that the material is not there.
Two outlines labeled by tradeoff
One outline gets approved. Two get compared. The label makes the bet explicit, so you decide on the tradeoff rather than on which one you read first.
The four-part section
Point as a sentence exposes a section with nothing to say. Evidence ties each section to your notes. Reader state keeps the argument moving instead of stacking facts. Share stops an eighty-word section from being asked to carry half the piece.
'Already decided' and the no-intro, no-conclusion rule
The ledger of decisions you have made travels with the piece, so the assistant does not reopen them. The intro and conclusion rule removes the two sections that are almost always template, not content.
The unused-notes line
Shows what both structures dropped. Sometimes it is a cut. Sometimes it is the most honest line you have, and the real piece is in it.
Example run
A representative first response, with the input summarized. Your results will differ by model and material.
Filled for the nurse manager in the variable examples: a fixed angle about bedside handover, a skeptical reader on another unit, 1,200 words for the internal newsletter, the near-miss story required, the patient unnamed, and the notes with the time figures, the complaints, the survey, and the line about the unit upstairs.
Outline A. Leads with the near-miss; strongest opening, risks making the piece about one incident. 1. Point: A patient corrected her own medication list during handover, and that only happened because handover was happening where she could hear it. Evidence: "near-miss caught when a patient corrected the medication list during handover." [VERIFY: what the error on the list was, and whether it would have reached her. The notes say "near-miss" without detail, and the point depends on it.] Reader state: this is about safety, not about process. Share: one fifth. 2. Point: We moved handover to the bedside as a unit decision, not a mandate, and it was slower before it was faster. Evidence: "our unit's choice" under already decided; 38 minutes before, 22 minutes after eight weeks. [VERIFY: what handover time looked like in weeks one and two. The notes give only before and after, and "slower before it was faster" needs the middle.] Reader state: they did this themselves, and it cost them something first. Share: one quarter. 3. Point: Two patients complained about privacy in the first month, and we changed how we stand, not whether we do it. Evidence: "two privacy complaints in month one." [VERIFY: what you actually changed in response. The notes record the complaints, not the fix.] Reader state: the obvious objection has been met honestly. Share: one fifth. 4. Point: After eight weeks most of the unit would not go back, and the three who disagree have a reason worth hearing. Evidence: 14 of 19 preferred it; 3 did not; 2 did not answer. [VERIFY: what the three said, if the survey had a comment field.] Reader state: this is a majority, not unanimity, and the writer is not hiding that. Share: one quarter. 5. Point: Try it on one shift for one month, and measure the same two things we did. Evidence: the time figures from section 2 and the survey from section 4. Reader state: this is small enough to try. Share: the remainder. Outline B. Leads with the time saved; faster to the practical point, risks sounding like an efficiency memo. (Outline B continues in the same four-part form, with the 38-to-22 figure in section 1, the near-miss in section 3, and the same [VERIFY] markers.) Notes neither outline used: "the unit upstairs tried this and stopped, nobody knows why." It may be the most honest line you have, and it needs a [VERIFY] before it can carry weight in either direction.
The two outlines make genuinely different bets, and the labels say what each costs. Four [VERIFY] markers appeared, each pointing at a question the writer could answer with a phone call or a look at the survey file. The unused-notes line sent her upstairs to ask why the other unit stopped (they had tried it on nights, with one nurse, and no one measured anything). That answer became the real second section of outline A, which she chose.
Follow-up prompts
The second turn is where vibe writing happens. These are the short messages that keep the session moving.
When you want to adjust the order without reopening the points
Outline A, with sections 3 and 4 swapped. Show only the two sections in their new positions with their new shares. Do not touch the points or the evidence.
When you have answered a [VERIFY]
Section 3 [VERIFY] answered: we moved to the foot of the bed and lowered our voices; one of the two patients was satisfied, one was not. Update only section 3's evidence and point.
When you have more notes for a thin section
More notes for section 1: [PASTE NOTES]. Rewrite section 1's evidence line only.
When you want to test the structure against the reader
Which section would a skeptical charge nurse skip, and what would the piece lose? One line. Do not restructure.
When you are done
Outline A as it now stands is locked. I will bring voice notes and material for the draft next. Do not draft yet.
When it goes wrong
Symptoms you will actually see, the usual cause, and the correction that works.
Both outlines are the same structure with different headings.
- Cause
- Asked for two of anything, assistants tend to produce cosmetic variants. The tradeoff label helps but does not always force a real difference.
- Fix
- Reply: 'These make the same bet. Give me the version that leads with [THE OTHER THING], and say in one line what that costs.'
Sections are headings ('Background', 'The Results') rather than points.
- Cause
- Heading-shaped sections are the default outline format, and the four-part rule gets dropped under it.
- Fix
- Reply: 'Rewrite every point as a sentence that could be false.' A section whose point cannot be false has nothing to say.
A section's evidence cites something that is not in your notes.
- Cause
- The slot demanded evidence and the assistant supplied some.
- Fix
- Delete it and reply: 'Evidence must quote my notes. Where there is none, write [VERIFY].' Then reread the section to see whether it still earns its place.
The outline quietly broadens the angle into 'why bedside handover works'.
- Cause
- Your angle was arguable, and the assistant prefers the safer general version.
- Fix
- Paste the angle back: 'The angle is fixed: [THE ANGLE]. Which sections argue something else? Cut or refocus them.'
An introduction and a conclusion appear anyway.
- Cause
- Template habit.
- Fix
- Reply: 'Remove the sections that preview and repeat. If the format needs a close, make it a point with evidence, like the others.'
Before you publish
The prompt cannot do these. You can.
- Every point sentence should be something you believe and could say to the reader's face. If one is not, that section is the assistant's, not yours.
- Open your notes and find the line each evidence entry cites. Loose paraphrase in the outline is where drift starts.
- Copy the [VERIFY] markers into your research list before drafting. Drafting over a gap buries it.
- Read the unused-notes line twice. It is either a cut or the real piece.
- The tradeoff labels are the assistant's reading of its own outlines. Decide whether you agree with the labels before you decide between the outlines.
Questions
Why two outlines instead of one?
One outline gets approved because it is there. Two outlines labeled by tradeoff turn approval into a judgment: you are choosing a bet, not accepting a default. If both are wrong, that is also useful. You have learned what the material resists.
What if my notes do not support the angle?
The prompt says so in one line and outlines it anyway, and the [VERIFY] count tells you how far off you are. If more than half the sections carry a marker, either gather material or change the angle on purpose. What you should not do is let the assistant change it for you by drift.
Can I give it an outline I wrote myself?
Yes. Paste yours under 'already decided' and ask for the four-part treatment of your sections plus one alternative that makes a different bet. The evidence and [VERIFY] lines are often worth more on your own outline than on the assistant's.
How much should the raw notes contain?
Everything you might use. The outline can only cite what is there, so a page of mess beats a paragraph of summary. If you have a voice memo transcript, paste the transcript, not your memory of it.