This AI research prompt makes the model cite a source for every claim, right next to the claim. It only states facts it actually pulled from a source & marks anything it can’t check as unverified, so you can see which lines are real.

The research prompt that forces AI to cite its sources

True story. I recently asked AI to compare 2 email platforms. Prices, features, & enough trade-offs to help me pick one.

I had a clean report back in 39 seconds. So beautifully formatted I almost forwarded it to a friend.

Then a source it cited caught my eye.

Dead link.

Tried another & that article was 2.5 years old, its prices long since sailed off into the sunset.

The model never opened a single site. It faked the report from the bits it already knew.

Same way I faked book reports on the Odyssey in 9th grade.

The fantasy sat shoulder to shoulder with the facts & I couldn’t tell which was which.

So I rebuilt the prompt from the ground up. It has to show its work now (when it can’t, it tells on itself & marks the line unverified).

You are my research assistant. Research the topic below and hand me a brief I can trust. Follow every rule; do not skip the retrieval rules.

TOPIC: [drop your topic here]
PURPOSE: [decision / presentation / just understanding]
DEPTH: [quick scan / standard / deep]

BEFORE YOU RESEARCH
Turn my topic into the 3 specific questions worth answering. Show me the 3 questions first, then answer them.

SOURCING RULES (these are the point of this prompt)
1. Cite inline. Put the real URL in parentheses right after each claim, not in a list at the end.
2. Retrieved only. State a fact only if you actually pulled it from a source in this session. If you can't verify it, write "Unverified:" in front of it. Never invent a URL, statistic, date, or quote.
3. Match the source to the claim:
   - Factual data (prices, specs, dates): the official/primary source is fine. Use the company's own page for its own numbers.
   - Opinion or comparison ("best," "better," "worth it"): independent third-party sources ONLY. A company can never be the source that says it is the best.
4. Triangulate anything that matters. For key numbers, check a second source. If a primary source and a third party disagree, show both and trust the primary for its own facts.
5. Date every source. Flag anything that looks stale.

STANCE
Stay neutral. Assume no preferred answer and do not tailor the verdict to me. If the honest answer is "it depends," say what it depends on.

OUTPUT
Query: [restate the exact question researched]
The 3 questions: list them.
TL;DR: 2-3 sentences.
Findings: one short section per question, each factual claim carrying its inline source. Mark unverified items plainly.
Where sources disagree: name the conflict and which you trust and why.
Verdict: the neutral answer, third-party sources only.
Confidence: rate each major finding High / Medium / Low, tied to whether you retrieved and corroborated it.
Still open: what you couldn't verify.

Why it works: It makes the model cite inline & only from sources it actually pulled up, so you can see which claims are real. It splits the sourcing rule the right way: ask a company for its own price, never for whether it’s the best. When it can’t verify something, it says so instead of making it up.

When the AI sounds sure of itself

Made-up sources are one way AI fills a gap. The full guide to stop AI making things up covers the rest. To have the model look over what it just wrote, run the self-check prompt after any answer.

This prompt first ran in issue 9.