Drafts — From Reading to a Cited First Draft

Drafts is the end of the pipeline the rest of Feedpik feeds: you read, you save, and this turns a pile of saved articles into a first draft where every claim cites the article it came from. Max plan.

It is not a general writing tool and it deliberately cannot write from nothing. The generator is given your attached articles and told to use only those.

The shape of it

Open Drafts in the sidebar, press New draft, give it a title. Then two panes:

Left is the draft. A plain text area, Markdown, yours to edit. It saves as you type — the header says Saving… then Saved.

Right is the materials. Add opens your articles with a filter box; click to attach. Up to 20 materials on a draft.

The title is not decoration — it is passed to the generator as the topic, so Why chip lead times matter again produces something quite different from chips.

Generating

Generate draft reads the materials and writes: a working title, a one-or-two-sentence hook, three to six short sections, and a closing takeaway. Every factual claim carries a marker like [1] or [2][3], numbered by the material's position in your list.

Costs 8 credits. Charged only when a draft actually comes back — a failed generation costs nothing.

Once there is text, the button becomes Regenerate from materials, which replaces what is in the editor. Copy anything you want to keep first.

Only the first 8 materials reach the generator, and about 2,500 characters of each. You can attach 20, and the extras are useful as a reading list attached to the piece, but they are not what the draft is written from. Put the ones you actually want cited at the top.

Two materials, minimum

Attach exactly one article and Feedpik warns you before you generate, because the instruction that keeps the generator honest — write from the materials and nothing else — makes a single-material draft a paraphrase engine.

Facts are free to reuse. The framing, the selection, and the order they are told in are the other writer's work, and a one-material draft inherits all three. Add a second source before you publish it anywhere.

Getting it out

Copy with sources puts the draft on your clipboard with a Sources list underneath, mapping each [n] to its title, publication and URL.

Use it rather than selecting the text by hand. A hand-selected draft carries the [1] markers and leaves the list that explains them behind — a published piece full of orphan citations, the attribution lost in transit.

There is no publish step and no export format. The draft leaves by being copied.

Where materials come from

Two routes, and the first is the one that makes this worth having:

Add to draft, on any open article. A piece you are writing collects its sources while you read, rather than being assembled from memory afterwards.

Add, in the materials pane, which lists your articles with a filter box.

The assistant also opens inside a draft, with the draft and its materials in context — useful for "what is missing here" before you generate.

If something looks wrong

Generate did nothing — a draft with no materials cannot be generated. Attach at least one, ideally two.

Claims cite the wrong article — [n] follows the material's position in the list, so reordering or removing a material after generating leaves the old numbers behind. Regenerate after changing materials.

A material shows as missing — the article was removed from your account. Missing materials are skipped by the generator and left out of the copied source list.

I attached 20 and it clearly used a handful — by design: 8 reach the generator. Reorder so the ones you want cited are first.

Regenerate wiped my edits — it replaces the editor's contents. There is no undo, so copy before regenerating.

I do not have Drafts — it is a Max feature, along with Tracking. See plans.