Website AI Summary Bookmark Reader

Give the note a review state

Label a generated note by what you have actually done: an unreviewed preview, a source-checked summary, or a project note that needs more evidence. This is more useful than inventing a numerical confidence score. It tells the next reader which step remains.

Confirm the source identity before reviewing sentences. Is this the intended article, version, and language? Was the whole body supplied, or only a preview? Keep missing figures, sections, or access limitations attached to the note.

Map claims to passages

Identify the claims most important to your purpose and find their support in the original. Check names, dates, quantities, causal language, and conditions. Distinguish a faithful paraphrase from a direct quotation; quotation marks require matching source wording.

Review meaningful omissions too. A short account can use recognizable sentences while dropping a caveat that changes the conclusion. Restore the limitation or narrow the summary’s role. Faithfully representing an article is still different from independently establishing its claims.

Keep the reading task inside its boundaries

OWASP’s guidance covers prompt injection through untrusted external material. A webpage should not be treated as permission to disclose private notes or perform unrelated actions. Keep source accuracy and tool access as separate review questions.

For task design, begin with the AI bookmark guide. For the stages of an LLM reading workflow, use the AI LLM guide. When reviewing the summary takes more work than reading the original, return to the source instead of treating the generated note as mandatory.