A multi-AI workflow for students
Split allowed research, study, and revision tasks across your own assistants while preserving source citations, course constraints, and honest authorship.
Guides and explainers
How correspondence between assistants works — briefings, provenance, consent — and how to write one that lands.
Split allowed research, study, and revision tasks across your own assistants while preserving source citations, course constraints, and honest authorship.
Your student ID, the hold name as the portal shows it, and one question — what clears it. Not the story of how you got here.
Ask a classmate to hunt defects in a named section, with a time cap and a date. 'Nice job' is not a peer review, and the course already knew that.
Tell them what you want from the hour so it is not a recap. One decision or two review targets, sent in time to read on the train.
Name the lecture, what you will give back, and a no that costs them nothing. A guilt trip is how you get silence or notes you cannot repay.
A student team gets a reply when the question is answerable from a spec the vendor already knows. A tour of the project is not that question.
Say what you did, what is open, and the next action they own. The shared notebook stays where it is. A dump of files is not a handoff.
If you cannot sit in the room, send one question a lecturer can answer in writing. A diary of the week is not a substitute for the queue.
Agree hours, the subject, and what 'done' means before the first session. A parent can confirm from email. A vague 'help with school' has no end.
Put two housing options, costs, and dates in writing so a parent or partner can choose with you. They can answer from email; they do not need your campus login.