Writing an Annotated Bibliography with AI

An annotated bibliography pairs a citation with a short note about a source. Purdue OWL describes annotations that may summarize, assess and reflect on how a work fits a project; the required balance depends on the assignment and citation style. AI can propose a template or check that the note addresses these questions, but a model can fabricate a reference or misstate a paper it has not read. Begin with verified records from a library database, publisher, DOI registry or the source itself. Read enough of each work to understand its question, evidence and limits. A summary states what the author argues or reports. An assessment asks how the source was produced, how strong or limited its evidence is and whether it fits the assignment. A reflection explains how the source might be used in your own research. Do not label a paper 'unbiased' merely because AI says so; point to a method, perspective or limitation. If you have only an abstract, disclose that limit instead of implying a full-text evaluation. Keep source identity and annotation separate. A correctly formatted citation can still contain a wrong title, date or DOI if the underlying metadata were copied blindly. Check every field. When AI rewrites an annotation, compare the new wording with the source so it does not turn an association into causation or add a conclusion the authors did not make. Use the requested citation style and length, and ensure each entry addresses the same research question rather than becoming an isolated mini-summary. Follow the course policy for AI assistance and attribution. If use is allowed, document the role of the tool as required; do not submit an invented reading history. A useful assistant helps a writer notice missing evaluation or inconsistent formatting, while the writer supplies accurate understanding and judgment about how each source contributes to the project.