Skip to main content
Upload your draft chapter and the supervisor’s comments. Anara reads both, classifies each comment by what it actually requires, and drafts a revision strategy with specific changes and library citations where the argument needs strengthening. For PhD students navigating the long middle of a dissertation with a list of feedback that keeps growing.

​
1. Describe the task

Your supervisor has returned the chapter with comments. Some of them ask for new literature. Some ask you to clarify an argument you thought was already clear. Some are stylistic. All of them are sitting in a document you have been avoiding opening. Anara can read both the draft and the feedback together. It works through each comment, classifies what it actually requires, and drafts a response strategy: which comments need a citation from your library, which need the argument restructured, which need a paragraph rewritten. For comments that require new evidence, Anara searches your library and returns the passages that address the gap. This workflow does not replace your judgment about the chapter. You know the field and the argument. What Anara saves is the time spent decoding what each comment means and deciding where to start. By the end of one session you have a classified comment list and a draft revision plan, not a blank document and an anxious afternoon. Here a PhD student in venous leg ulcer wound care nursing has a supervisor’s annotated draft and twenty-six weeks of work still to go before submission. 
I'm revising my PhD thesis chapter on compression therapy adherence in VLU nursing. Attached are two documents: my draft chapter and my supervisor's feedback PDF.

Read both. For each supervisor comment, do the following:
1. State what kind of change it requires: new citation, argument restructure, writing clarity, or factual check.
2. Draft a specific revision action for that comment.
3. If the comment requires a new citation, search my library and name the best supporting passage.

Present the output as a numbered list matching the order of the comments. Flag any comment you cannot resolve from my current library so I know where I need to find new literature.

​
2. Give Anara context

Required context
  • Your draft chapter, uploaded to your library or attached to the chat.
  • The supervisor’s feedback, either as a PDF of track-changes comments or a separate feedback document.
Optional context
  • The folder of papers relevant to this chapter. Anara searches it for citation support when the feedback requests stronger evidence.
  • Your target submission date and the chapter’s role in the dissertation. Helps Anara prioritize which comments are most structurally significant.

​
3. What Anara creates

A classified revision plan: each supervisor comment matched to a change type and a specific revision action. For comments requiring additional evidence, the relevant library passage is named with a citation. For comments requiring structural changes, a revised argument or paragraph outline is drafted. The plan is the working document for your next writing session. Where the library cannot cover a gap, Anara flags it so you know exactly what new reading you need before you can respond.

​
4. Follow-up prompts

​
Draft the response letter

When the revision is complete and you need to write back to your supervisor. 
Draft a response letter addressing each comment from the list. For each one, summarize the change I made and explain the reasoning. Keep the tone collaborative. Number the responses to match the original comment list.

​
Add citations to the flagged sections

When the plan identified gaps your library does not cover and you have since found new papers. 
I've imported three new papers on compression adherence. Search them and suggest where in the chapter they can be cited to address the supervisor's comment about insufficient evidence on patient self-management.

​
Improve the register of a revised paragraph

When the draft revision is technically correct but the language is not at the right level. 
Here is the revised paragraph for comment 4. It is accurate but reads too informally for the chapter. Improve the academic register without changing the argument or the citations.

​
5. Tricks, tips, and troubleshooting

​
How you word your prompt shapes what you get

Numbering the comments in your feedback document before you upload it makes the output much easier to work with. If the feedback is embedded in a track-changes PDF, ask Anara to extract and list all comments first before classifying them. Including “flag any comment you cannot resolve from my current library” is important: it prevents Anara from generating plausible-sounding citations to papers you do not have, which is the failure mode that causes most downstream pain when you discover the citation was invented.

​
Check the output against your own understanding

Anara classifies comments based on what the text says, not what your supervisor means. Supervisors sometimes write “clarify this” when they mean “I disagree with this.” Read each comment yourself before accepting the classification. If the revision plan treats a fundamental challenge to your argument as a writing-clarity edit, correct that before you start revising. The classification is a starting point, not a verdict.

​
What to do with the output next

Work through the revision plan comment by comment, opening the relevant library papers in split-screen as you revise. When the chapter is substantially revised, run the claim-verification workflow on any paragraph that was substantially rewritten to check that new citations accurately support the revised claims. Once the chapter is ready, draft the response letter to your supervisor using the follow-up prompt, then save both the revised chapter and the response letter as notes you can share.