The beginner's guide to NotebookLM and Gemini Notebook
A supplier delegation wants to visit next month, and the site rules and the visit proposal are in two different documents. A notebook can answer from both; the check is whether it tells you what the rules require or what has actually happened.
What does your job involve?
Six jobs for a small set of sources read together: cited answers, comparisons, briefings, audio and study material. Each card says where to start, a prompt to use and the check that matters.
Open a task to see where to start, the access to check, a prompt to use and what to check in the result.
Find an answer across a source pack Notebook → Sources and Chat
Understand a pack without treating a summary as the complete record.
- Where to start
- Create a notebook, add the sources with + Add in the Sources panel, and ask one question in Chat.
- Access to check
- Notebook access and supported sources; usage limits vary.
- Bring this
- A small set of sources you may use and a written question.
Try this in Gemini Notebook
Using only the selected sources, answer [question]. Cite the supporting passage and relevant exception. Keep missing facts explicit and distinguish policy from proposals. If sources disagree, show the disagreement rather than silently resolving it.Why this request helps: A selected source set and exceptions make the answer reviewable.
Check before using it: Open citations and read the surrounding passage.
If this route is missing: Paste a short extract into your usual work chat.
Compare current and proposed documents Notebook → source comparison
See the change without losing which version is authoritative.
- Where to start
- Label each source with its role before asking for differences.
- Access to check
- Source access, readable material and the correct versions.
- Bring this
- Current policy and proposed revision.
Try this in Gemini Notebook
Compare [current policy] with [proposal]. Separate unchanged rules, proposed changes and conflicts. Cite each source and keep the proposal labelled. Do not treat a newer file date as proof of approval.Why this request helps: Source roles prevent a draft becoming the rule because it looks newer.
Check before using it: Check who has agreed the proposal, and read the cited exceptions.
If this route is missing: Compare the extracts yourself or in your usual work chat.
Create a briefing report Notebook → Studio report
Turn a source pack into a useful first briefing.
- Where to start
- After checking a chat answer, open the Studio panel, choose Reports and pick Briefing document.
- Access to check
- Studio/report availability and current source set.
- Bring this
- Audience, decision and checked sources.
Try this in Gemini Notebook
Create a brief for [audience/decision] from the selected sources. Separate established facts, proposals, disagreements and questions to confirm. Keep source references with important claims. Do not introduce an unsupported case study or recommendation.Why this request helps: The brief follows a real reader’s decision rather than producing a generic source summary.
Check before using it: Trace the important claims, then read the document you export to Docs.
If this route is missing: Save a checked chat answer as a note and format it in your editor.
Listen to an audio overview Notebook → Studio audio
Get oriented while retaining a route back to the evidence.
- Where to start
- In the Studio panel, choose Audio Overview; use the customise option to name the points it must cover.
- Access to check
- Audio output and usage available; generated narration still needs checking.
- Bring this
- Selected sources and the points or qualifications you need covered.
Try this in Gemini Notebook
Prepare an audio overview of [topic] from these sources. Emphasise [question], disagreements and conditions. Keep proposals unconfirmed and do not add examples presented as real evidence.Why this request helps: Specifying the important qualifications helps focus the overview; audio fluency cannot verify the source.
Check before using it: Listen for omitted exceptions and check important claims against the original.
If this route is missing: Ask for a short written briefing you can read.
Make a learning outline or quiz Notebook → Studio learning output
Help a reader use a procedure rather than memorise a summary.
- Where to start
- Select the relevant sources, then choose a study guide, flashcards or quiz in the Studio panel.
- Access to check
- Studio learning-output availability and suitable source material.
- Bring this
- The procedure or source, and the learner's first useful task.
Try this in Gemini Notebook
Make a short study guide and five questions about applying [procedure] from these sources. Explain each answer and cite its basis. Test decisions and exceptions, not trivia about document titles. Do not invent rules.Why this request helps: Application questions reinforce something the learner can do with the source.
Check before using it: Compare answers with the procedure and remove ambiguous or unsupported questions.
If this route is missing: Ask source Chat for an explained checklist.
Refresh an outdated source pack Notebook → Sources
Keep recurring answers attached to current evidence.
- Where to start
- Open the Sources panel and check which sources came from Drive (they update themselves) and which were uploaded (they don't).
- Access to check
- Drive sources sync every few minutes, or use Click to sync with Google Drive; uploads and pasted text are snapshots.
- Bring this
- Current versions and an explicit source authority list.
Try this in Gemini Notebook
Before answering [question], list which selected sources and versions support it. Use the current source and show conflicts with older material. If a required current file is missing, stop before the conclusion and ask for it.Why this request helps: Fresh evidence matters more than reusing a polished previous answer.
Check before using it: Check the Sources panel against the current original files and replace stale uploads.
If this route is missing: Create a new small notebook with the current files.
Know what you have
Gemini Notebook: the feature map
Use this map to distinguish a reply, an editable output and an action in another app. Availability depends on the signed-in account, enabled features and the specific operation.
| Feature | Useful for | Where | Access / limit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sources and Chat | Questions with citations | Notebook source set | Source types, selection and readable content |
| Reports and notes | Briefings from a checked source pack | Chat / Studio | Output and export availability |
| Audio overview | Spoken orientation | Studio | Usage limits; retain source qualifications |
| Learning outputs | Study guides and application questions | Studio | Supported format and factual source basis |
| Other Studio visuals | Source maps or slide-oriented outputs | Studio where available | Check the format; not every output is editable |
| Source refresh | Recurring source-backed answers | Sources panel | Drive sources sync; uploads and pasted text don't |
Find out what your account can use
- Use your work Google account and open Gemini Notebook at notebook.google.com (formerly NotebookLM).
- Create a small notebook and find the Sources, Chat and Studio panels. Add only the sources the job needs.
- Name each source by its role and date. Drive sources update themselves; uploads and pasted text don't.
- Check the output and its citations before sharing; exported files have their own sharing settings.
If a Studio output is missing, use the source chat and a plain checked note. The useful first job is a source-backed answer, not generating every available format.
Ask your administrator:
Which Google account should I use for Gemini Notebook at work? Please confirm whether notebooks and Studio outputs are on for my account, whether I can add files from Drive, which information I may use, and who agrees sharing. I want to try [specific task] with the access we already have.Official sources
What you'll make
a two-source notebook, a cited answer that keeps rules and evidence apart, and one short briefing report made from it.
What you'll need
a Google account with Gemini Notebook (Google renamed NotebookLM in July 2026; the tool and your notebooks are unchanged), and two or three documents you’re allowed to use. To practise, save the two fictional sources in the worked example as text files. Keep the notebook unshared. About fifteen minutes.
Example result.
The visit is not ready to confirm. The policy limits groups to 12 [1, §2]; the proposal lists 15 visitors [2]. Every visitor needs a named host [1, §1]; the host is “to be confirmed” [2]. The policy requires a site induction on arrival [1, §3], but nothing shows one has been arranged. Photographs need approval from Communications [1, §4]; the proposal asks for a LinkedIn photo and records no approval [2].
1. Create the notebook and add the sources
Open Gemini Notebook at notebook.google.com (the old notebooklm.google address redirects there) and select Create new notebook. In the pop-up, choose Upload a source and add both files. To add more later, use + Add in the Sources panel. Give each file a clear name: “Site visitor policy, current” and “Visit proposal, draft”.
Why this works: the notebook answers only from the sources you give it, so naming them by role (the rule, the request) makes it obvious in every citation which kind of evidence you’re looking at.
What you should see: both sources listed and ticked in the Sources panel, and a short summary of them in Chat.
2. Ask one question in Chat
Using only the selected sources, can this visit be confirmed as planned?
For each requirement in the policy, say whether the proposal meets it,
breaks it or doesn't say. Cite the source and section for each point.
Keep what the policy requires separate from what has actually been done.Why this works: “meets, breaks or doesn’t say” gives the gaps a place to go, and the last line asks for the distinction this tool is most likely to blur.
What you should see: an answer with numbered citations. Hover over or select a number to see the passage it came from.
3. Open the citations and check
Open every citation. For each sentence, ask: is this something the policy requires, or something the proposal shows has happened? Then check the numbers yourself: group size against the limit, and host against the named-host rule.
Why this works: a notebook can cite correctly and still state a rule as if it were done. The citation proves where the words came from, not that the thing happened.
What you should see: every “required” point cited to the policy, every “planned” or “missing” point cited to the proposal, and nothing described as done that no source records.
4. Make one Studio output and check it again
In the Studio panel, choose Reports, then Briefing document. When it’s ready, read it against the checked chat answer. Shorter outputs, and especially an Audio Overview, are where “needs a named host” turns into “will be hosted”.
Why this works: each transformation is another chance to drop a qualification. Checking the shorter version against the longer one is quicker than checking it against the sources again.
What you should see: a report that still says the group is too large, the host is unconfirmed and the photo needs approval. If it doesn’t, use the repair below, then generate it again.
Check the result
- Group size: the answer says 15 against a limit of 12.
- Host: still “to be confirmed”, not a name.
- Induction and photo approval: described as required, not as done.
- The briefing report keeps all three of those points.
The usual failure: a rule becomes a fact. “All visitors will complete the site induction on arrival” sounds like a plan, but it’s the policy’s requirement restated as if someone had arranged it. Spot it by checking which source each claim cites: a “done” claim citing only the policy is the giveaway.
Some sentences state a policy requirement as if it had already happened.
Rewrite them as requirements still to be met, and say which source
would need to show that each one has been done.
Keep the citations, and don't add any names or dates.Worked example: the induction nobody booked
Fictional example. The two sources:
Site visitor policy — current
§1 Every visitor must have a named host employee for the whole visit.
§2 Groups are limited to 12 visitors at a time.
§3 All visitors complete a 10-minute site induction on arrival.
§4 Photographs on site need written approval from Communications.Visit proposal — draft
Thursday 19 November 2026, 10:00–12:00
Visitors: 15 from Halden Packaging
Host: to be confirmed
Plan: tour of the packing line, then lunch in the canteen
Request: a group photo for LinkedInThe first chat answer said: “The visit needs a named host and is over the group limit. All visitors will complete the site induction on arrival, and a group photo is planned for LinkedIn.”
- Two points were right. The group-size breach (15 against 12) and the missing host were both caught and cited correctly.
- Two were rules turned into facts. “Will complete the site induction” cited only §3, and nothing in the proposal arranges one. “A group photo is planned” left out that §4 needs approval. The repair prompt rewrote both as requirements still to be met, giving the answer at the top of this page.
- The briefing report needed one more pass. Its first version said “photography approved for LinkedIn”. Running the repair prompt on the report fixed it, which is why step 4 checks the output separately.
Task kit for this job: Download (ZIP) · Reusable instructions
Go deeper
Keep sources current
A source is a snapshot unless it comes from Drive. Google Docs, Slides and Sheets imported from Drive update themselves every few minutes (or open the source and choose Click to sync with Google Drive); uploaded files and pasted text stay as they were when you added them. Before you rely on an older notebook, open Sources, check which are uploads and replace anything superseded. Exports to Docs or Sheets have their own sharing settings and don’t update with the notebook. Walkthrough: refresh a notebook when the source documents change.
Notebook or long-PDF assistant?
A notebook is strongest when the answer depends on several sources read together, like a rule and a request. For one long or scanned PDF, a PDF assistant that cites page numbers may be the better tool: see Check an answer from a long PDF with Acrobat AI Assistant. More on building the pack: choose sources for a notebook and check the cited passage.