Write a literature review

Point Anara at a folder of papers and it drafts a full, multi-section literature review organized by theme, with every claim cited to a specific passage you can click to verify. Use it when you have the sources and the argument and need a structured first draft to edit.

Prompt

A PhD student in environmental policy drafts a dissertation chapter from a folder of 42 papers.

Write the literature review chapter for my dissertation on EU climate adaptation governance. My papers are in the folder "Climate Adaptation Policy" (42 papers).

Organize the chapter around four themes: (1) how national adaptation plans are framed in the literature, (2) the relationship between national plans and EU cohesion funding, (3) sub-national implementation variation, (4) existing debates about policy effectiveness.

The chapter should argue that the current academic consensus underestimates implementation gaps at the sub-national level. Build toward that argument across the four themes. Target 4,000 to 5,000 words.

Use only papers in my library. For every claim, include an inline citation to the specific passage. Flag any claim where you cannot find direct support in the folder so I can decide whether to soften it or find a source.

What to add to your library

• Required: a folder containing the papers you want the review drafted from.
• Optional: the argument the chapter should build toward, so Anara writes toward it rather than a neutral overview.
• Optional: the thematic structure, target word count, and register of your field.
• Optional: the foundational papers that should carry more weight.

What you get

• A full chapter drafted in one pass: introduction, thematic sections, transitions, and a conclusion that lands the argument.
• Inline citations linked to the specific passage in each source PDF, never to papers you don't have.
• Inline flags wherever your library doesn't support a claim, so you can find a source or adjust the argument.

Follow-ups

Tighten a section that hedges.

The section on sub-national implementation is too cautious. Rewrite it to argue more directly that the literature systematically under-measures local variation. Keep every claim tied to a passage citation.

Restructure around a different argument.

I want to reframe the chapter around institutional capacity rather than funding alignment. Restructure the four sections so they build toward that argument, keep the citations tied to passages, and flag any sections where the evidence in my library no longer supports the new framing.

Tips

• Always include "use only papers in my library." Without it, Anara may add papers from its academic index that lack clickable passage links.
• Ask for the whole chapter in one prompt, then iterate section by section. The draft is more coherent than one built piece by piece.
• Save the draft as a note, then run the claim-verification workflow before finalizing.