I’ve tried at least a dozen prompt variants to get something useful from a large language model (LLM) when feeding it super long text. Think PDF exports from meetings, customer call transcripts from tools like Gong, or 10,000+ word policy documents. The problem? The AI often misses key points—or worse—starts hallucinating summaries that subtly distort the original meaning.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
The most effective summarization approach I’ve found doesn’t rely on saying “Summarize this” and pasting a wall of text. That kind of prompt almost always fails if the input exceeds the model’s context length or mixes unrelated topics. Instead, the real trick involves chunking, role-setting, and prompt chaining.
Prompt Technique
Description
Best Use Case
Chunk-Based Summarization
Split long input into smaller parts, summarize each separately
When input is over 4,000 tokens
Task-Role Prompting
Ask the AI to pretend it’s a specific role (e.g., meeting secretary)
Performance reviews, calls, interviews
Hybrid Extraction-Generation
Force extraction of quotes/facts, then ask for synthesis
Legal docs, research articles
To wrap up: if you want summarizations that actually hold up under scrutiny, you’ll need to go far beyond “TL;DR”—it’s all about controlling how the model thinks about its own context.
Most common failures—and how to prevent them
Failure #1: The summary skips key topics because it’s processed linearly. This happens a lot with company memos or weekly recap emails—things at the bottom get ignored. Solution? Reorder the prompt. Put the most important sections at the start if you can’t do chunking.
Failure #2: Output is fluent but false. Example: I pasted a 12-page customer interview, and the GPT-generated summary confidently reported that the customer requested a feature we never discussed. There was one sentence that said, “We’re not looking for…” and it got flipped entirely. Fix? Use this preface to the prompt: You must only generate summaries using phrases directly found in the input. Do not infer or invent intentions.
Failure #3: Generic corporate-speak summary. “This meeting covered various topics relating to future planning.” Thanks, helpful 😐 This mostly comes from overusing vague instructions. Be specific. Try this instead: List the three most controversial or debated points raised in this conversation. Give 1-paragraph summaries and indicate who said what if possible.
Ultimately, sloppy input = trash output. You’re not just telling it what to do; you’re shaping how it thinks before it does it.
Prompt templates that consistently work
My go-to summarization formats have evolved over time. Below are the three that have held up best, even with wildly different inputs:
Topic-Driven Snapshot Prompt: “Imagine you are creating a 1-slide presentation to explain this document to a busy executive. Extract the three main issues, and explain them in high-level bullet points with just one sentence each.”
This nails it for things like marketing updates, audit reports, or early-stage product plans.
Dialogue-Focused Reflection Prompt: “You are a meeting summarizer. For each participant, list their three main contributions or concerns. Use their names.”
Perfect for transcripts or multi-speaker interviews. Works well with Whisper-generated audio transcripts too.
Fact-Integrity Extract-then-Summarize (2-step): Part 1: Extract all factual claims, quotes, and dates mentioned in the text Part 2: Now synthesize these into a summary paragraph, without adding any new information
Tedious but reliable for technical reports or regulatory content.
At the end of the day, a good summarization prompt isn’t elegant—it’s functional. Leave the creativity for output tone, not structure.
Chunking: the only real strategy for long input
Chunking means dividing a long document into smaller parts so the AI can actually read and understand it. Most LLMs hit a maximum token limit (kind of like a word count). Once you go past that, they forget, skip, or hallucinate. Some tools let you paste huge blocks, but even then you’ll run into weird behaviors if there’s no break.
My chunking method is super manual but completely solid:
Break the document into ~2-page equivalents (roughly 2,000–3,000 tokens)
Feed each section with the prompt: Summarize just this part without assuming anything not stated
Collect all the summaries—then feed those into a new final prompt: Given these section summaries, what are the overall main insights, controversies, and action items?
This also works great inside workflows—like if you’re using Make or Zapier to grab Google Docs, split them, and push parts to OpenAI before recombining.
To sum up: chunking is a hassle but the only safe bet if you care about accuracy in long-format summarization.
Prompting for meetings, interviews, and calls
Real-time conversations are messy. People talk over each other, switch topics mid-sentence, or mention the same thing five different ways. That’s why summarizing them is tough—but also why it’s worth doing right.
Here’s what works near-perfectly on transcripts from Zoom, Google Meet, or screen-recorded audio analyses (assuming you transcribe it first with Otter or Whisper):
Add a speaker map at the top of your prompt. Something like:
Participants: - John Smith (VP Sales) - Emily Zhang (Product Manager) - Carla Rios (Engineering Director)
Use this instruction: For each participant, write 1–2 bullet points summarizing what they said or asked. Group by speaker.
Optional: If you want takeaways, add: Then write the 3 biggest unresolved questions that came up. Quote them directly.
Bonus tip: if there’s a big moment in the call you want to analyze (a disagreement or feature discussion), isolate that section and use a prompt like: Explain why this point was controversial and what each person proposed.
The bottom line is: AI handles summaries best when you act as its focus-coach before letting it off the leash.
Graph-based prompting for structured output
If you want something truly reliable—especially for repeatable kinds of documents like follow-up emails or meeting recaps—a graph-based prompting format helps.
I call it this because you’re kind of forcing the AI to imagine a structured “node” for each element you care about. For example:
You are creating a semantic graph from this transcript. Extract the following nodes:
- Decisions Made (list and explain briefly)
- Open Questions (quote and list)
- Action Items (who assigned, who owns, what is due)
- Participants Who Spoke Most (list top 3)
- Sentiment Score (positive, neutral, negative commentary)
This prompt works especially well with strategy discussions or client check-in calls. You can drop it into Notion databases, CRMs, or auto-send via email summary tools. Also possible to convert to JSON automatically if you run the AI output through a scripting step.
Finally: graph-style prompts feel more technical, but ironically, they generate the most human-usable summaries.
Real-world problems solved by high-quality summaries
Here are some scenarios where these prompts saved me hours or saved a team from working off bad info:
Customer research synthesis: I had 7 interviews to turn into a report. Asked GPT to list frustrations by product area using this: For each interview, extract 2–3 user pain points and tag them as UX, Performance, Clarity, or Support. Then summarized trends across all interviews.
Daily standup recaps: People missed meetings. Prompted an LLM to read Slack transcripts and summarize blockers per person. We caught a missed deadline early.
Board memo drafts: Fed in a financial update and used a tone prompt: Rewrite this for board-level investors, highlighting only growth risks and wins. Omit all internal details.
These aren’t hypothetical. I’ve copy-pasted those prompts dozens of times now, and they just work—without tweaking every time.
As a final point: good summarization isn’t flashy, but when done well, it turns noise into decisions.
