Draft a Xiaohongshu post from verified information
Create a useful Xiaohongshu-native draft without fabricating personal experience, results, or trends
8 min setupTested with:ChatGPTReviewed: 2026-08-28
1
Add your context
Your text stays in this browser. AILesson Prompts does not send it to a model or server.
2
Your prompt
Unfilled fields remain visible as placeholders, so you can still copy and edit the prompt
Draft a Xiaohongshu note from verified information only.
Facts, sources, dates, product details, actual experience, permissions, and limits:
[facts]
Reader situation, question, purpose, action, account identity, and genuine viewpoint:
[brief]
Length, disclosure, prohibited words, privacy, visuals, hashtags, CTA, and review:
[rules]
Separate firsthand experience, verified fact, interpretation, recommendation, and unknown. Never turn secondhand material into “I tried,” invent a transformation, diary, dialogue, price, trend, popularity, scarcity, testimonial, before-and-after result, or lifestyle detail. Produce several accurate title options without absolute, fear-based, or curiosity-gap claims the body cannot satisfy. Draft a scannable note with reader context, useful method or evidence, limitations, and proportionate CTA. If commercial or affiliate context is supplied, disclose it clearly according to the stated rule. Suggest only visuals that exist or are explicitly marked for creation; protect personal information. Use a small number of relevant hashtags, not fabricated hot tags. Provide a fact-and-experience ledger and pre-publication checks.
Private by defaultPrompt assembly happens locally in your browser. Avoid placing confidential information into any AI service unless your organization allows it.
From input to outcome
A worked example
See how concrete context turns this recipe into a usable result
Actual input
Verified information
Account owner actually used a paper handoff checklist for two weeks with a five-person content team. Recorded result: 12 recurring handoffs reviewed; 4 lacked a named accepter, and the team added accepters. No measured productivity or error reduction. Checklist fields: requester, owner, accepter, acceptance evidence, escalation. The downloadable checklist is our free product; no affiliate payment. Screenshots exist but contain client names and must be redacted.
Audience and goal
Chinese Xiaohongshu note for first-time small-team managers who see tasks stuck at review. Goal: teach a five-field audit and invite readers to download the free checklist. Account voice is practical and first-person only for the documented two-week use.
Publishing constraints
700-900 Chinese characters. Clearly state our ownership of the free checklist. Avoid 必看、封神、绝绝子、100% and efficiency guarantees. Up to five relevant hashtags. Cover plus three screenshots after redaction; no client names. No fake comments or diary scenes.
Ledger: the two-week use, five-person team, 12 handoffs, four missing accepters, and subsequent additions are documented firsthand facts. No productivity outcome is claimed. Ownership and no-affiliate disclosure are explicit.
Why this works
1
Experience labels prevent platform-native voice from becoming fabricated autobiography.
2
Title-to-body checks preserve usefulness without misleading hooks.
Check the result
Is every first-person statement a supplied, authorized firsthand experience?
Do titles accurately match the evidence and body?
Are commercial context, limitations, privacy, and asset status clear?
ChatGPT