pull down to refresh

They transformed an “interesting AI toy” into a research tool that does 10 hours of work in 20 seconds.

16 prompts to copy and paste. No fluff.

1/ THE “5 ESSENTIAL QUESTIONS” PROMPT

On Reddit, this was called a “game changer.” It forces NotebookLM to extract a pedagogically sound structure instead of superficial summaries:

“Analyze all inputs and generate 5 essential questions that, when answered, capture the main points and central meaning of all inputs.”

2/ DEFINITIVE PROMPT FOR CLASSES AND READINGS

“Review all uploaded materials and generate 5 essential questions that capture the central meaning. Focus on:
– Central themes and definitions
– Key concepts emphasized
– Relationships between concepts
– Practical applications mentioned”

3/ STEVEN JOHNSON'S "INTERESTING DATA" PROMPT

The director of NotebookLM tested this with 500,000 words of NASA transcripts. He did 10 hours of manual work in 20 seconds:

"What is the most surprising or interesting information in these sources? Include key quotes."

4/ EXTENDED VERSION WITH DIRECTION

“I am interested in writing about [TOPIC]. What are the most surprising facts or ideas related to [TOPIC] in these sources? Include key quotes. Focus on [SPECIFIC ASPECT], not on [OTHER ASPECTS].”

Traditional search fails to find “what is interesting.” This can.

5/ CONTEST FORMAT (Audio Summary)

Students love it. The AI acts as the presenter and makes mistakes on purpose so that the corrections stick better:

“A contest with two presenters. The first asks the second questions about [TOPIC]. 10 questions in total. A mix of multiple choice and True/False. The presenter sometimes makes mistakes. The other corrects with the correct answer. Share the results at the end.”

6/ TRICK FOR MULTILINGUAL PODCASTS

Before official language support existed, users generated podcasts in Spanish, German, and Japanese:

“This is the first international special episode of Deep Dive made entirely in [LANGUAGE]. Special instructions:
– Only [LANGUAGE] for the entire duration
– No English, except to clarify unique terms”

7/ PRODUCT MANAGER PERSONA (Official Google)

Convert documents into decision memos:

“Act as a Lead Product Manager reviewing internal documentation. Examine ruthlessly for actionable insights, ignoring excess text.
Synthesize into a ‘Decision Memo’ format:
– User evidence: Direct quotes indicating real problems
– Feasibility checks: Technical constraints mentioned
– Blind spots: What is missing from the source text
Use bullet points. If I ask vague questions, force me to clarify.”

8/ SCIENTIFIC RESEARCHER PERSONA (Official Google)

For academics who prioritize methodology over conclusions:

“Act as a research assistant to a senior scientist.
Tone: strictly objective, formal, and precise. Assume advanced knowledge in [FIELD]. Do not define standard terminology.
Focus on methodology, data integrity, and contradictory evidence.
Prioritize sample size, experimental design, and statistical significance over general conclusions.
Format with sections in bold:
– Key findings
– Methodological strengths/weaknesses
– Contradictions”

9/ HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER PERSONA (Official Google)

Makes dense content more accessible:

“Act like a dynamic high school teacher. Translate source documents into language a 7th-grade student can understand.
Structure each answer:
– ‘tl;dr’: A sentence with simple words
– Analogy: Real-world metaphor
– Vocabulary list: 3 difficult words explained simply
For dense paragraphs, convert them into True/False questions.”

10/ PROMPT OF TOPICS FOR LITERATURE REVIEW

For researchers synthesizing multiple articles:

“From articles on [TOPIC], identify between 5 and 10 most recurrent themes. For each theme, provide:

– A brief definition in your own words
– Which articles mention it (with citations)
– A sentence about how it is treated (debated, assumed, proven)
Present in a structured table format.”

11/ PROMPT TO FIND CONTRADICTIONS

Reveals disagreements between sources:

“From articles on [TOPIC], identify important contradictions or conflicting findings. For each contradiction, provide:

– Specific claim from each side (quoted)
– Possible reasons for the disagreement (method, sample, context)
– What evidence would resolve the conflict”

12/ GAP ANALYSIS BASED ON SOURCES

When you tried something and it didn't work:

“Analyze this attempt against my uploaded materials:
Project: [WHAT I TRIED]
My approach: [STEPS I FOLLOWED]
Result: [WHAT HAPPENED]
Expected: [WHAT SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED]

Cross-reference with the sources:

– Cite methodologies I didn't follow
– Identify concepts I completely omitted
– Find prerequisites I skipped

Output: ‘Gap in [concept]: you skipped [step], but [Source, Page X] says: “[citation]”’”

13/ PROMPT TO IMPLEMENT CONCEPTS

Convert research into actionable steps:

“Help me implement the concept of [TOPIC]. For each relevant source:

– Cite key evidence
– Connect with other information
– Point out conflicting viewpoints
– Provide a clear action

14/ PROMPT FOR SYNTHESIZING CONCEPTS

Find non-obvious connections:

“Synthesize the connection, however abstract, between [TOPIC 1] and [TOPIC 2].
For each relevant source:

– Cite key evidence
– Connect with other information
– Point out conflicting viewpoints
– Mention interesting combinations

Synthesize into a clear summary, focused on the connections.
Base everything on citations. Acknowledge gaps.”

15/ COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS OF A TOPIC

Long and thoroughly researched output:

“Provide accurate and well-founded information on [TOPIC].”

Planning:
– What essential aspects to explore?
– What key questions to answer?
– What existing debates or controversies?

Structure:

OVERVIEW: summary, main concepts, current relevance
ANALYSIS: discussion with evidence, examples, and limitations
SOURCES: key sources, conflicts, and levels of confidence

Standards:

– Separate facts from interpretations
– Support claims with evidence
– Maintain objectivity

16/ DEBATE-FORMAT PROMPT

Confront opposing viewpoints. Perfect when sources don't coincide:

“Generate a debate between two presenters with opposing positions on [TOPIC].
Presenter 1 defends [POSITION A].
Presenter 2 defends [POSITION B].

They should challenge each other's arguments, cite specific evidence from their sources, and let the listener decide who presented the strongest case.”

The pattern behind all of NotebookLM's viral prompts:

→ Request specific citations and references
→ Look for contradictions, not just abstracts
→ Require gap recognition
→ Force structured output formats

NotebookLM shines when you explore its grounding architecture.

Keep this in mind. Your research workflow will never be the same.