Verified against Perplexity Pro · 2026-08-03
Get only what changed since you last checked, not the whole topic re-explained
A recurring monitoring prompt that anchors to a prior summary and cutoff date so each re-run reports only material changes since then, explicitly connecting new findings back to what they replace, instead of a fresh full explanation every time.
The prompt
Ready to copy — highlighted parts are example details you can swap.
I already know the state of this as of 2026-06-15 — do not re-explain what's below, treat it as ground truth for what I already know and build only on top of it. TOPIC Regulatory status of AI usage disclosure requirements in the EU WHAT I ALREADY KNOW (as of 2026-06-15) As of June 15, the EU AI Act disclosure requirements for general-purpose AI models were finalized but enforcement guidance was still pending from national regulators. TASK Search only for information dated after 2026-06-15. Report only what is new or has materially changed since then — only changes that affect our compliance deadline or disclosure format, not general commentary or opinion pieces. RULES - If nothing material changed, say that in one line, and briefly note what you searched to confirm that, so "nothing changed" reads as a checked result rather than a skipped step. - Do not manufacture a change out of routine, non-material coverage just to have something to report — a new article restating the same known facts is not a change. - For each real change: state what changed, the date it happened or was reported, and the source. - If a change contradicts or updates something in what I already know above, say so explicitly — "this replaces/updates X above" — rather than adding it alongside the old information without connecting the two, which would leave me holding two versions of the same fact with no indication which one is now current. - Do not repeat anything from the prior summary above unless it is necessary context for understanding why a new change matters. - If you find something that seems significant but you're not fully confident it's actually new (it might already be reflected in what I know, phrased differently), flag it as "possibly already known, please confirm" rather than either silently dropping it or confidently presenting it as new.
Customize
Optional — swap in your own details for the highlighted parts above.
Why this works
A new Perplexity thread has no memory of a previous thread's answer, and even within a Space, a fresh question tends to get re-answered from scratch rather than diffed against what was already established — so the mechanic here is re-anchoring by hand: pasting the prior summary and its cutoff date back in as literal input turns a stateless lookup into a de facto recurring monitor. Restricting the search to dates after the cutoff, rather than asking a general question again, is what actually prevents the tool from re-surfacing and re-explaining facts that were already known, since without that constraint a fresh search naturally re-finds the same background sources it found last time and reports them as if they were new. The instruction to connect a new finding back to a specific line in the prior summary — 'this replaces X above' — matters because a list of updates with no stated relationship to prior knowledge leaves the reader to do the diffing themselves, which defeats the purpose of asking for only what changed in the first place. The 'possibly already known, please confirm' flag exists for a genuinely hard sub-problem this setup creates: distinguishing a finding that's actually new from one that's the same underlying fact restated in different words is not a task the model can resolve with certainty on its own, since it can't see inside your head to know exactly how you'd phrase what you already know — giving it an explicit third option between 'definitely new' and 'silently drop it' turns an unreliable binary judgment call into a flagged item you can resolve yourself in seconds, which is far cheaper than either missing a real update or being told about the same fact twice under two different names.
What you get back
Since June 15: national enforcement guidance was published July 28 by the relevant EU authority, specifying a phased disclosure rollout — this replaces the "enforcement guidance still pending" line in what you already know above. No other material changes found; two opinion pieces about the Act appeared in trade press but contain no new regulatory information, so they are not reported as changes.
Verified against
Perplexity Pro Spaces + Sonar Pro · 2026-08-03
Changelog
- 2026-08-03 — Initial publish, verified against Perplexity Spaces with Sonar Pro search.
Need this built into your business?
If a prompt isn't enough — what Scult builds, built and maintained for you — that's Scult's day job.
EXPLORE WHAT SCULT BUILDS
