ChatGPT Pro RSS: review a selected set of feed entries

Assemble the material you want discussed

Choose a manageable collection of entries and include each title, canonical URL, publication date, and relevant text. Assign short source labels that remain visible throughout the discussion. If an entry contains only a brief summary, say so; a response based on that summary should not imply that the full article was examined.

Describe the audience and the decision they need to make. For example, a maintainer may need to know which release announcements change a deployment checklist. That is more specific than requesting a general summary of technology news. OpenAI's ChatGPT prompting guide is a primary reference for organizing context, instructions, and constraints.

Request an output that exposes its evidence

Using the supplied entries, identify changes relevant to maintainers.
For each finding, give the source label, practical consequence,
and any detail that the source leaves unresolved.
Keep factual claims within the supplied material.

Ask for a short explanation before requesting polished promotional copy. It is easier to check a direct statement of what changed than a paragraph optimized for excitement. Once the facts are correct, refine the wording for your publication's tone and length.

When the supplied entries disagree, ask for the disagreement to be preserved. A useful answer may explain that two sources refer to different versions or dates. Resolving that conflict requires additional evidence, not simply choosing whichever statement reads more confidently.

Keep review separate from drafting

1. Read each factual finding beside its supporting passage.
2. Check names, versions, dates, and numerical claims.
3. Confirm that every source label points to the intended entry.
4. Remove conclusions that exceed the supplied evidence.
5. Approve the copy only after those comparisons are complete.

Retain the input collection and final approved text. If a source later changes, you can inspect what was available when the draft was reviewed. For a recurring exercise, keep several representative questions and compare new drafts against the same reference material. The feed prompt guide helps turn a useful one-time task into a maintainable editorial instruction.