Tag: Notion

  • Tana and Heptabase: How I Use Both to Build My Knowledge System

    Tana and Heptabase: How I Use Both to Build My Knowledge System

    Author’s Note:
    This article itself is a practical application of the workflow described within it.

    The core ideas were structured using the Tana #WritingFunction framework mentioned in the text, which was used to organize viewpoints, examples, and the main body of the article. The logic was then validated and the wording refined through discussions with Claude.

    The central ideas, personal experiences, usage cases, and opinions in this article are all original. Any AI-assisted content has been manually reviewed and confirmed.


    Before We Begin

    “Should I choose A or B?” This is probably a question that comes up in almost every discussion about tools in any specialized field. In the world of note-taking and knowledge management, you constantly see similar debates: Logseq or Obsidian? Notion or Roam Research? And for me, the A and B that kept me torn for a long time were Heptabase and Tana.

    To be honest, this was probably a kind of obsession. We always hope to find an all-in-one tool that can solve everything at once—capturing, organizing, thinking, and producing output, all in a single place. In fact, many tools really are evolving in this direction.

    But the problem is that when you try to make one tool cover every scenario, you end up with something that is only “okay” at each of them, and truly excellent at none. This isn’t the tool’s fault; it’s a contradiction in our own expectations. More importantly, we’re easily led astray by features. We focus too much on “what this tool can do” and forget the more fundamental question: “What do I actually want to achieve?”

    In the end, when it comes to knowledge management, techniques and features are only the surface. What really matters is how you build your way of thinking, how you understand knowledge, and what you can ultimately distill into something that truly belongs to you.

    Both Heptabase and Tana are products I genuinely love. They are platforms I want to use for a long time to learn and to accumulate knowledge. But these two products are completely different, both in philosophy and in functionality. How should I choose? This question troubled me for a long time and consumed a great deal of my time and energy.

    I remember repeatedly trying to make one of them my all-in-one solution, and repeatedly failing. I kept searching for “the perfect fit,” only to realize that each had irreplaceable strengths. Switching back and forth left me anxious and inefficient.

    Yet it was precisely this period of hesitation and struggle that gradually helped me figure out a few things.

    Why do I need them? What problems do I actually want them to help me solve?

    As the answers to these questions became clearer, the dilemma that had bothered me for so long suddenly dissolved. I stopped obsessing over “which one to choose” and instead decided to use both. That was the original starting point of this article.

    Today, I won’t go into detailed introductions of the specific features of either tool—those can easily be found on their official websites and in tutorials. What I really want to talk about is how I understand these two products from the perspective of product philosophy and real needs, and why I ultimately chose to “practice both.”

    If you’re struggling with a similar question, perhaps this article can offer you a different way of thinking.

    Preface

    In 2023, I left my company. All kinds of notes I had accumulated over more than ten years were returned along with the computer. That moment actually felt pretty good, because I no longer had to maintain all that scattered, messy information. What followed was a chance to start from scratch—for me, that meant no historical baggage and no need to worry about data migration. I could rebuild a knowledge system of my own, centered around the fields and questions I truly care about, and reconstruct my thinking framework from the ground up.

    Not long after, I came across Heptabase and Tana, and began trying to use a single tool to handle all of my knowledge management. Over the past few years, I’ve switched back and forth between them, hoping to find the most suitable approach. But every attempt lasted only a few months at most. I always felt something was off, yet I couldn’t quite articulate what.

    So where exactly was the problem?

    It took me a long time to gradually realize that the issue wasn’t the tools themselves at all. These two tools follow completely different philosophies. One emphasizes space, the other structure. They’re not really comparable in the first place. Yet I had trapped myself in the obsession with “all in one,” always wanting a single tool to cover every scenario. The result was that nothing was properly addressed, and nothing was done well.

    To be honest, this shift in mindset took me quite a long time.

    That’s why in this article, I want to revisit the topic of knowledge management. I want to talk about my years of going back and forth between tools, my confusion along the way, and how I now think about the question of “how to choose a knowledge management tool.”

    Heptabase vs. Tana

    The characteristics of these two products are very distinct, and their differences are substantial.

    Heptabase is essentially a tool for spatial thinking. It completely frees notes from the logic of linear text, allowing us to organize information on a two-dimensional plane. It’s a bit like breaking down complex problems, placing all the variables, relationships, and logic within the same field of view.

    For example, the kind of case analysis scenes we often see in movies and TV shows:

    Ideas that were originally scattered across different documents are turned into movable cards. You can reposition them at any time, create connections, and form groups. This process is, in fact, a visualization of your thinking path.

    But what ultimately convinced me to pay wasn’t this interaction style itself—it was the product’s underlying understanding of “knowledge.” The core of Heptabase is not “recording information,” but “understanding knowledge.” It treats thinking as a spatial activity that requires seeing the whole picture, discovering connections, and building structures. This is completely different from the traditional note-taking logic of “write it down and you’re done.”

    The founder, Alan, explains this very clearly in his article My Vision Project Meta: the ultimate goal of note-taking tools should not be storage, but helping people understand complex things. I strongly resonate with this idea.

    By contrast, Tana takes a completely different path. What it focuses on is not the “big picture,” but “structure”—or more precisely, how to organize information through structure.

    I’ve always preferred outline-based tools, for a simple reason: they’re fast and flexible, ideal for capturing things in the moment. During my years at the company, I used Logseq and OmniOutliner for a long time. They worked fine for note-taking, but had one fatal flaw—information was flat and fragmented, lacking semantic connections. You could record a lot, but everything remained isolated nodes. You knew they were there, but it was hard to form a systematic knowledge network.

    Tana’s core innovation lies in Supertags, and this was also the main reason I decided to pay for it. Supertags turn each node from just a piece of text into an “object” that can carry structure and attributes. This means we can move information from the level of simple “recording” to the level of “modeling.”

    For example, when recording a book: in traditional outline tools, you can only write the title plus some notes. In Tana, however, you can define the author, publication year, domain classification, reading status, and even link it to your own thoughts and writing. This isn’t just a functional difference—it’s a cognitive upgrade. We begin to understand knowledge in a structured way, instead of merely piling up information.

    Of course, on the other hand, Tana is also the tool with the steepest learning curve I’ve ever encountered. It requires a certain level of abstract thinking and modeling ability. You need to define your own ontology, design structured fields, and build query logic. This process is far from easy and inevitably involves repeated trial and error, patience, and persistence.

    To be honest, I gave up on Tana several times halfway through. It wasn’t until the past year, as my understanding of structured thinking deepened, that I finally started to use it smoothly.

    Going Further

    There are many tool products out there, but the ones that truly endure are never those with the longest feature lists. They last because they embody a unique way of thinking. At their core, every good tool is an externalization of how its founding team understands a particular domain. How they see the problem determines what the product looks like—and also how you, as a user, are guided to think when using it.

    In other words, a tool is not just a passive container. It also expresses a way of thinking.

    Heptabase and Tana are two classic examples. One spatializes “thinking,” the other structures “knowledge.” You might say, isn’t that just a difference in interface and interaction?

    No. What lies beneath is two completely different views on knowledge management and information processing. Heptabase focuses on “seeing relationships.” It believes that thinking requires a global view, that hidden connections must be discovered in space. Tana, on the other hand, focuses on “defining relationships.” It believes knowledge must be structured and that information should be organized through explicit semantics.

    One is bottom-up emergence; the other is top-down construction. Ultimately, both tools are answering the same question:

    How should we handle information so that it truly becomes knowledge?

    Heptabase: Spatializing Thinking

    As mentioned earlier, what Heptabase does is liberate notes from linear text. That may sound trivial, but in fact it is a redefinition of what “thinking” is.

    In Heptabase, every piece of information is a card. Cards can be freely placed, grouped, and connected on a whiteboard. As the number of cards grows, you begin to notice something: you are no longer merely recording things—you are building a map of your thinking.

    Why do this? Because the human brain does not process complex problems in a linear way. We need to see the whole picture, discover hidden connections, and move back and forth between different pieces of information before new understanding can emerge. Traditional notes are page after page of documents; your field of view is limited. Heptabase externalizes this process.

    Here’s an example. Recently, I was organizing a whiteboard about Japan’s interest rate policy, triggered by news that the Bank of Japan was considering raising rates. I started wondering: what is the logic behind this? What chain reactions might it cause?

    So I began placing cards on the board: the background of this rate hike, its triggers, how a stronger yen might affect international markets, several major interest rate policy shifts in Japan’s history… Each new card raised new questions. Gradually, a structure began to emerge on the board. I realized that I had developed a completely different understanding of “the lost thirty years” and “the ten-year cycle.” Bits of information that I had once read in isolation suddenly connected into a coherent line.

    This is the core value of Heptabase. It doesn’t help you store notes; it helps you clarify your thinking. When you turn fragmented information into movable cards and continuously adjust their positions and connections on a whiteboard, you are really doing one thing: turning the thinking process in your head into something visible and manipulable.

    This is something traditional note-taking tools cannot do. In those tools, once you’ve written something down, it’s basically finished. In Heptabase, writing is only the beginning. The real thinking happens when you reorganize the cards. You discover new relationships, raise new questions, overturn old conclusions. Thinking no longer stays inside your head—it becomes a structure you can actually see.

    That’s why Heptabase is easy to start with, but hard to master. What’s hard about it? You have to actively build. You have to be willing to spend time breaking problems apart, repeatedly adjusting the positions of cards, and wrestling with your own thoughts in the process. It’s slow and tiring.

    But that is what deep thinking really looks like.

    By the way, the whiteboard example I mentioned is only a starting point. You can also check out the official “Chip War” case study—it’s more complete and better demonstrates the power of this way of thinking.

    Tana: Structuring Thinking

    If Heptabase helps you see your thinking, then Tana helps you organize it.

    So what is its core idea? It turns the logic of your thinking into structures that can be defined and reused.

    In Tana, every piece of information is a node. But unlike traditional outliners, each node here can carry semantic structure through Supertags. You can define what this node is, what attributes it has, and how it relates to other nodes. When these nodes reference, link to, and nest within one another, you gradually see them weaving into a dynamic knowledge network.

    This means your notes are no longer dusty text that sits unused after being written, but structured information that can be organized, reasoned over, and even trigger actions.

    Let me share a few of my own examples.

    Daily capture of thoughts

    I use the tag #Signal to record my daily thoughts and summaries. But I don’t just record them — I also add structured annotations:

    • Domain: Which field does this thought belong to? For example, macroeconomics, product design, AI applications…
    • Context: In what situation did this idea arise?
    • Content: What exactly is the thought?

    Take the note about the Bank of Japan possibly raising interest rates as an example. I don’t just record the fact that “the BOJ may raise rates,” but also tag its domain (macroeconomics), its context (pressure from yen appreciation), and the specific analytical content.

    The benefit of this approach is that later I can retrieve and organize these thoughts by domain, by context, or by time — from different dimensions. Each piece of information is no longer isolated, but a knowledge node with an “identity tag.”

    Solidifying a writing framework

    Writing is an even more typical case — for me, it is essentially a process of structured thinking. So I created a dedicated #WritingFunction tag, breaking article writing into a set of fixed questions:

    Core questions (to answer every time):

    • Core message: What is this article trying to say?
    • Background & context: Why write it, and in what situation?
    • Key insight: What new discovery do I have?
    • Core viewpoint: What is my position?

    Optional modules (used as needed):

    • Supporting evidence: What materials support my argument?
    • Analogies: Can analogies help understanding?
    • Perspective shift: Would it be clearer from another angle?
    • Cognitive progression: What further thinking can this article provoke?

    This framework is essentially my “thinking framework” for writing. It ensures that each piece is not improvised on the spot, written wherever it goes, but instead becomes a systematic reasoning process. I no longer have to start from scratch every time to figure out how to write; I just fill in, expand, and refine within the framework. This very article was drafted under this Writing Function and then refined through discussions with AI.

    The framework itself is also iterative. When I find certain questions repeatedly useful, I solidify them into the template. When some questions prove unhelpful, I remove them.

    Modeling company analysis

    Using the same logic, I also built a model for company analysis — an ontology structure for fundamental analysis. What does that mean? It means I defined the dimensions needed to understand a company.

    For example, in the Palantir case shown above:

    • Business model: What are the main products? Where does revenue come from?
    • Customer base: Who does it serve — governments, enterprises, or individuals?
    • Growth path: How does it expand — through product iteration or market expansion?

    Once this model is built, I can quickly analyze any new company with it. Instead of rethinking “what should I look at” every time, I simply fill in and compare according to the template. This goes beyond traditional note-taking and turns my way of thinking into a reusable structure.

    So what is Tana’s true value in these scenarios? I believe it is definitely not about recording information, but about making your thinking logic explicit and structured — turning it into something that can be built, reused, and iterated. In other words, these frameworks composed of Supertags in Tana are the externalization of how we think.

    This is also why Tana has such a steep learning curve. It requires strong structured thinking: you need to know how you think before you can build that logic using Supertags, fields, and queries. This process takes time. I personally gave up several times along the way, and only in the past year did I truly start to use it smoothly.

    But honestly, the process itself is very valuable. I gained a much clearer understanding of how I think. It constantly forces you to ask: how do I actually understand a problem? What is my thinking framework? That alone is already extremely worthwhile.

    Back to the Fundamentals: What Is the Logic of Knowledge Management?

    After talking about these two products, we actually need to return to a more fundamental question:

    How do we truly understand “knowledge”? What do we think we are managing, and how should it be managed?

    This question is important. We cannot decide what form tools take, but we can decide our own philosophy. A person capable of independent thinking should have their own view of knowledge. That understanding is the real logic behind choosing tools.

    Many times, you’ll find that tools recommended by others look extremely tempting to try. But once you actually start using them, they feel awkward no matter what you do.

    Where is the problem? It’s not really the tool itself, but the fact that it doesn’t fit the way you think. Or rather, you may not yet have a sufficiently clear methodology to make full use of it. That’s not a bad thing. On the contrary, it’s a reminder that you should pause and think about your own logic of knowledge management.

    We don’t have to chase every new tool or keep experimenting endlessly. We should first clarify how we ourselves think.

    Essentially, whether it’s knowledge management or building an understanding of the world, the first step is probably not to aim for a specific tool. It is to find your own logic and philosophy. Only then can you truly choose—or even shape—tools that match your way of thinking.

    For example, if you want your knowledge management process to move from chaos to clarity, you may need to first lay everything out and look for connections in space—then Heptabase might be what you need. But if your thinking style is more standardized, where you define a framework first and then fill it in, Tana might suit you better.

    Neither approach is right or wrong. What matters is that you know which one you want.

    Don’t Be Obsessed with “All in One”

    Knowledge management itself is a huge topic. It consists of many different scenarios, and everyone emphasizes different aspects. When you stack them together, the logic becomes very complex.

    For me, there are only two core concerns:

    1. How to quickly capture and structure information to form my foundational knowledge material, preparing for future personal “model training”;
    2. How to integrate this material around a specific question or domain into a complete knowledge framework, enabling deeper research into a topic.

    These don’t sound special. Tana and Heptabase both seem capable of doing them. But in practice, neither alone works well. Heptabase’s whiteboards are powerful for organizing information and divergent thinking, but inefficient for quick capture and structured processing. Tana excels at recording and structuring, but because its product design is node-centric, it is not good at presenting a holistic view.

    Trying to focus on details while also maintaining a bird’s-eye view within a single tool is, at least for now, unrealistic—or more precisely, very awkward to use. So this year I changed my approach and started using Tana and Heptabase in parallel. Tana handles early-stage quick capture and structuring as a foundational database; Heptabase handles later-stage synthesis on whiteboards, building a global perspective around specific questions and domains.

    Interestingly, after running this setup for a while, I realized that the copying and pasting between two tools didn’t add as much workload as I had feared (compared to forcing everything into an all-in-one solution).

    Why? Because in Tana, every type of information has its own structured fields. The act of recording is already a process of understanding and digesting information. Through this “Q&A-style” approach, I end up with highly complete material. When importing it into Heptabase, very little adjustment is needed—it’s immediately usable.

    This brings us back to the core point mentioned earlier: tools are merely carriers of logic. What really matters is how you understand knowledge and how you build your thinking framework. Once that’s clear, Tana and Heptabase are no longer competitors, but complementary tools for different scenarios.

    That’s why I say: for knowledge management, don’t cling to the idea of all-in-one. Compared to the small cost of moving information between multiple tools, the cost of all-in-one solutions is often much higher. They not only reduce efficiency, but also easily confine your thinking within the boundaries of the tool.

    More importantly, when you’re obsessed with finding the perfect tool, you’re actually avoiding a deeper question. Tools are always just tools. Your understanding of your own thinking is what determines how much value a tool can truly deliver.

    So before choosing any particular tool, I suggest first clarifying your needs and your thinking process, then finding the tools that best fit each stage. Even if that means using two or three tools, as long as together they support your thinking workflow, that’s a good choice.

    Compared to a mature system, the cost of one or two extra tools is trivial.

    In Closing

    From a product perspective, all note-taking tools ultimately boil down to “create, delete, update, query” plus “views and presentation.” There won’t be huge differences in functionality. But that’s not the point. The real question is: why do we do knowledge management in the first place? It sounds abstract, but once you figure it out, many troubles simply disappear.

    If your goal is to store more information, any tool will do. But if your goal is to think better, then tool selection becomes a different question: can it make my thinking process explicit? Can it let me see how I think?

    That is what truly attracts me to Heptabase and Tana.

    They are not just helping me manage information—they are forcing me to understand my own way of thinking. Heptabase lets me see the spatial structure of thought; Tana lets me define the logical framework of thought. Once the system integrates with how you think, you no longer agonize over which feature to use, how to categorize things, or where to put them.

    So, back to the two protagonists of today’s article: if you ask me which one to choose, Heptabase or Tana, my answer would be—don’t rush to choose. Spend some time first understanding how you think and what kind of cognitive support you need. Then you’ll find that whether the answer is A, B, or both A and B, you already have it.

    And finally, one more thing: the endpoint of knowledge management is not building a perfect system, but becoming a clearer thinker. Tools are only the starting point. Thinking is the destination.

  • Let’s Talk About the Underrated Notion Agent and Its Charming Automated Workflows

    Let’s Talk About the Underrated Notion Agent and Its Charming Automated Workflows

    In 2022, when the rest of the world was only beginning to get a tangible sense of what AI could do, Notion had already become one of the earliest tools to integrate GPT-3. Its AI features have been evolving for years now. So if you ask me which “note-taking app” currently achieves the deepest and most practical integration with AI, I would, without hesitation, recommend Notion.

    Yet over these past three years, while Notion AI has iterated countless times, I’ve rarely seen people on my timelines talking about how easy and powerful it is. That inevitably leaves me feeling a bit regretful. Model upgrades can easily ignite waves of excitement, but after the hype settles, what really matters is whether AI can truly optimize—or even reinvent—our outdated workflows, rather than becoming just another traffic-chasing keyword for influencers. That’s what I genuinely care about.

    So in this article, I want to share a few topics:

    1. Why Notion AI Is Worth Trying
    2. How Much Potential Notion Agent Really Has
    3. How I Personally Use Notion AI
    4. Notion AI Pricing and Subscription Advice

    Every time I write about Notion, I can’t seem to control the length. This article is long, but I’m certain these are details very few people ever talk about. Next, I’ll start with a brief introduction to Notion AI’s basic capabilities. If you want to skip directly to the core topic of this article—Notion Agent—you can jump to the second section.

    1. The Basic Capabilities of Notion AI

    First of all, just like every other AI tool you’ve used, the fundamental way you interact with Notion AI is through a question-and-answer chat. You can select a paragraph on a page and ask directly, or you can open the AI panel on the right side and carry out a longer conversation, as shown in the example below.

    In addition, the selected paragraph is automatically added to the context in the right-hand panel, so you don’t need the extra step of copying and pasting.

    Beyond content-specific Q&A, Notion AI can also perform semantic search across your entire workspace. When you only remember the general idea of a note—but forget its title or which database it’s in—you can simply describe it vaguely, and the AI will locate the relevant note for you.

    Based on this ability, I built an item management hub in my Notion system. For certain important but infrequently used items, I’ve set their storage locations, so I can ask questions like this:

    And because Notion AI is connected to the latest models from Anthropic, OpenAI, and Google, it has full multimodal processing capability. It can handle text, analyze uploaded CSVs, PDFs, and images, perform online searches, and even accept direct webpage links—reading the page content before responding.

    After generating an answer, Notion AI can directly perform create/read/update/delete actions on your pages or databases. This means you can ask Notion AI to modify the original text of a note, or instruct it to create a new page and store the generated content in a specified location (including inside a database).

    Basically, anything DeepSeek or Doubao can answer, Notion can answer too—and usually does it even better. But the real key is this: at every moment of writing, note-taking, summarizing, reflecting, or doing a review, when you need AI, you never have to open a second tool. All your AI needs can stay entirely inside Notion—truly achieving an All-in-One workflow.

    In a note-taking setup without integrated AI, you typically need to switch between multiple windows repeatedly. If your task requires multi-turn conversations—or referencing several different notes—the number of these switches multiplies quickly. And when you finally want to save AI-generated content, you have to manually reformat it, add tags, delete unnecessary parts… everything must be done by hand.

    This tedious workflow not only wastes time—more importantly, it breaks your flow. While waiting for the AI to respond, you often get distracted: you might check your phone, scroll social media, watch a short video… and ten minutes disappear without you noticing.

    Notion AI’s real convenience is not just that it gives answers, but that it can handle everything inside and outside your workspace in one seamless environment. No more copying a paragraph into Doubao for analysis. No more pasting ChatGPT’s output back into your notes. Removing even a single context switch can mean a world of difference in user experience.

    When you need to write daily/weekly reports, you can simply reference all the documents you wrote this week inside the Notion AI panel, let it read them directly, and it will generate the report for you. When reviewing the key decision-making of a project, you can feed it multiple meeting notes, let it extract all discussed options, or even read the page’s version history to analyze how each decision evolved.

    You can also build a clipping database using the Save to Notion extension, add an AI field, and preset a specific processing prompt—for example, generate reading summaries or extract key information. In this way, you can have an unlimited AI-powered reading hub even without subscribing to Readwise.

    Notion is already ideal for organizing high-density, high-value information. With access to state-of-the-art AI models and the most seamless interaction experience, it naturally delivers better results than other note-taking tools.

    And thanks to a decade of Notion’s open ecosystem development, you can even search external data sources directly inside the AI window—Google Drive, Google Calendar, GitHub, Gmail, and more—provided you’re already within those ecosystems.

    Besides these built-in “connectors,” you can also link Notion with more tools through MCP, such as Cursor, Manus, Perplexity, ChatGPT, and others. You can send a Notion page link directly to these tools, and they can read the note content without any tedious copy-and-paste steps. These tools can also modify your Notion pages directly, based on your instructions.

    For example, when you receive a long research report via Manus, you used to manually copy and paste it into another note-taking app. But now, you can simply send the Notion page link to Manus, and Manus can write the content directly into the designated place inside Notion.

    Notion AI can take over your entire information-processing workflow—your notes, your tasks, your project documents, and even data from your connected third-party tools can all be processed faster and more directly. But these are only the basic applications of Notion AI; if it were merely “a chat window + quick access to information sources,” that alone wouldn’t be enough for me to keep using it long-term.

    The real purpose of this article is to show you the key capabilities and potential of Notion Agent.

    2. Notion Agent

    What Is an Agent
    Simply put, an Agent is an AI system capable of autonomously completing multi-step tasks on behalf of a human.

    Most AI Q&A tools you’ve used can only provide information or ideas. After receiving the answer, you still have to manually execute the next steps. They don’t know who you are, what projects you’re working on, or what your habits and preferences are. Every conversation resets to zero—you must repeatedly explain context and clarify your needs. Of course, if an AI tool supports “memory” or “projects,” this can improve slightly.

    But an Agent can do far more: once you give it a task, it can—within the scope of the information you authorize—intelligently make decisions, proactively call multiple tools, autonomously execute complex steps, and finally deliver the completed result back to you. All you need to do is enjoy the outcome. In addition, an Agent can not only store memory but also be trained. Through repeated interactions, it becomes smarter and more aligned with your expectations.

    How to Build a Notion Agent
    To use Notion Agent, you must first create a document specifically for the Agent. In this document, you define the Agent’s fundamental behavioral guidelines—for example: its identity and mission, communication and behavior rules, or the working scenarios and goals that shape its actions.

    Suppose your goal is to make Notion AI better assist your content creation. Then your minimal viable Agent document might look like this:

    After writing this document, go to Notion AI’s personalization settings and assign this document as the Agent’s system-level instruction, as shown below:

    Once this is done, every time Notion AI generates a response, it will first follow the instructions defined in this document. It will interact with you according to the behavioral guidelines you set. As a result, when answering the same question, Notion AI with an Agent document and Notion AI without one will give completely different answers—the former precise and personalized, the latter generic and mediocre.

    At this point, you might wonder: Isn’t this just giving the AI a prewritten prompt? If I paste the same prompt into Doubao or DeepSeek, won’t I get the same effect? To some extent, yes. But Notion Agent differs from ordinary AI chat tools in several key ways.

    1. Documentation Is the Rule

    Other AI tools require you to manually enter or copy-paste your prompts every single time. Notion Agent is different: its rules live directly inside a Notion document. They are automatically loaded, instantly editable, and immediately effective. More importantly, you can reference any existing Notion pages directly inside the Agent document—like this:

    In other words, you can plug your existing creative SOPs, your writing notes, and your preferred methodologies straight into the Agent at high speed—no extra setup, no code, no complicated configuration—because the Agent instruction file is itself just a regular Notion note.

    This creates a kind of “lift yourself by your own bootstraps” loop: Notion gives you a great environment for documenting your knowledge, and the Agent turns that accumulated knowledge into something executable. As you collaborate with the Agent, you’ll notice which parts of your notes work well, which parts need improvement, and where gaps exist. Then you refine your notes, and the Agent immediately becomes better. A positive feedback cycle naturally forms.

    This is the essence of “documentation is the rule.” Your notes are no longer static archives—they become executable rules, reusable processes, and testable knowledge.

    2. Agents Can Directly Operate Your Notion Workspace

    This is another fundamental capability of Notion Agent: it has permission to perform create/read/update/delete operations on your pages and databases. Other AI tools can only generate text responses, but Notion AI can directly execute underlying actions. Here are a few concrete examples:

    1️⃣ Create and Modify Notes

    When you finish discussing an idea with the AI, you can simply tell it to organize the conversation into a note and save it to a specific database. The AI will automatically read that database’s property fields, understand what each field is for, and then intelligently populate the content: applying the correct tags, linking related projects, setting priorities, etc.

    For example, when I was learning about Claude Skill, I asked Notion Agent to search the web for information, summarize it into a note, and store it in my Notes database, as shown below.

    Notion Agent not only organized the content correctly—it also knew which database was my Notes database, and automatically filled in all the database properties. It understood the meaning of the six basic tag categories for note-taking that I described in this article.

    2️⃣ Batch Operations Across Database Pages

    When you need to process tasks in bulk, Notion AI can act on an entire database at once. For example:

    • Mark all overdue tasks as high priority
    • Identify all tasks completed this week and generate a summary

    Actions that would normally require you to click through each item manually can now be completed in one sentence.

    Also, the example database in the screenshots was created entirely by Notion Agent—I simply told it: “Please understand the context and create a demonstration database for this sentence.”

    3️⃣ Workflow Automation

    Going further, you can ask the AI to automatically execute complex multistep sequences based on specific conditions. For instance, “Help me generate a weekly report” is not just simple data retrieval—it’s an entire workflow: accessing multiple data sources → filtering pages → reading content → applying a report template → saving it to the correct location and filling in properties. Every step is executed automatically according to your preset rules, without manual intervention.

    I’ll go into much more depth on automated workflows in later sections, so we’ll pause here for now.

    4️⃣ Modify Rules and Memory in Real Time Based on Your Instructions

    When you ask the Agent to generate a weekly report for the first time and find the summary too brief, you can simply say: “Remember, each task in the weekly report must include specific details of what was done.” The Agent will then proactively update the rules inside the Agent Document, and next time it will automatically follow this standard. Or if you notice that the Agent always over-compliments your writing during review, you can say: “From now on, just point out the issues—don’t praise me.” It will immediately adjust its tone and update the Agent Document accordingly.

    Once you get used to this interaction style, refining the Agent’s behavior becomes incredibly easy. One sentence is enough for it to remember and adapt—no need to rewrite complex rule documents. Your collaboration will naturally become more and more seamless.

    For example:

    And the effect:

    These foundational features together form the core capabilities of Notion Agent:

    • Document as Rules: your notes directly become the Agent’s behavioral instructions
    • Database as Memory: the Agent knows where to read and where to write
    • Conversation as Training: one sentence is enough for the Agent to remember and improve

    But underlying capabilities alone are not enough. The real challenge lies in how to organize these abilities and apply them to real work scenarios. Next, I’ll share some design principles for crafting effective Agent Documents, helping you connect these building blocks into truly useful workflows.

    3. Agent Design Principles

    Scenario Routing

    Real work scenarios are complex. When you say “take a look for me,” you might be asking the Agent to review an article, check a video script, or examine a project’s progress. The same sentence can imply totally different needs depending on context. Of course, you could write every possible situation directly into the Agent Document—but then the Agent would need to load all instructions for every conversation, wasting valuable context space.

    That’s why I recommend building your Agent Document with a progressive disclosure approach—layering information and loading details only when needed, instead of everything at once. My personal method is to define four core documents that must be loaded at the start of every conversation. Each new chat loads only the minimal necessary context.

    These core documents vary by person, depending on your unique workflow, but generally you should at least include:

    • Identity & Mission: who the Agent is, its core purpose, and whom it serves
    • Interaction Style: tone of communication, response format, when to be brief, when to elaborate
    • Continuously Updated Memory: user preferences, latest habits, ongoing requirements
    • About the User: the user’s identity, background, work style, values, etc.

    Only when the Agent detects specific keywords during a conversation does it load relevant sub-documents—like the example below. Each scenario sub-document includes a complete SOP: detailed workflow, evaluation criteria, and output format. This avoids loading all sub-documents at once and keeps the Agent’s responses focused and efficient.

    For example, while writing this very article, I can highlight a paragraph and ask the Agent to “generate an image.” Notion Agent will detect the keyword “generate image” and activate only the corresponding sub-document, Scenario N: Content Illustration Generation, as shown below:

    According to the SOP defined in the “Scenario N: Content Illustration Generation” document, Notion will automatically follow these steps:

    1. Select a style: default to the pre-determined illustration style
    2. Understand the content:
      • For partial illustrations: analyze the meaning of the selected text and the intended purpose of the image
      • For article covers: extract the core theme and emotional tone of the full piece
    3. Generate a prompt: Generate the image prompt: Based on the selected text + the default design-style document + contextual information + any additional notes from the chat window, directly output a complete image-generation prompt.

    In Step 3, I require the Agent to prioritize my predefined top-level design style, which specifies the default aesthetics, ratios, and stylistic preferences for images. This is why all images in this article generated with Nano Banana maintain a consistent visual style.

    The generation process and results are shown below:

    The same execution logic applies to other scenarios as well. For example, I created a “Diet Log” sub-workflow, and now I can simply send a photo of my food to Notion Agent and trigger this SOP with the keyword “what I ate today.” Notion Agent will automatically analyze the food items in the image, log calories, carbs, fats, and other data, and save everything to the designated database.

    It’s worth noting that the calorie estimates produced after image recognition are not completely accurate—they should be treated as a reference. However, identifying the types of food in the picture is quite straightforward, so… could this be used to build a dietary evaluation system?

    Suppose I am a patient with diabetes. I create a note called “Type 2 Diabetes Personal Health File,” place this note inside the required documents for the “Diet Log” workflow, and instruct the Agent to always compare any recognized food against the “restricted foods” list in the health file, and to clearly explain the food’s impact on blood sugar in its feedback:

    After eating, I send the photo to the Agent and trigger the workflow with the keyword “what I ate today.”

    Here is the feedback the Agent gives me:

    1. It logs the dietary data
    2. It provides clear health warnings

    Although AI models inherently have the ability to offer general medical advice, integrating personal health records and medical reminders greatly increases the relevance and usefulness of the output.

    From the above examples, we can see that the true power of Notion Agent lies in the combination of “keywords + sub-documents.”

    By using trigger keywords, the Agent enters a specific scenario, and the sub-documents nested inside that scenario (such as the health profile) further refine the execution rules. At the same time, this health profile is just a Notion page — easy to edit and adjust at any time. This layered structure allows the Agent to remain general-purpose while still becoming highly specialized when needed.

    If you’ve used Claude’s Skill feature, you’ll find the logic very similar — both follow a progressive loading approach based on “keyword trigger + sub-doc execution.”

    By comparison, Notion Agent’s limitation is that it can only call tools inside the Notion ecosystem, and cannot run custom scripts the way Skills can. But the advantage is that Notion Agent only needs to interact with documents — the barrier to entry is extremely low. As long as you can write a document, as long as you can articulate your idea — even poorly — you can simply keep talking to Notion Agent and let it ask you questions. Even if your answers are vague, the AI model can gradually infer your intentions and intelligently assemble the entire workflow for you.

    The Boundary of Information

    With scenario routing in place, the next challenge is determining where information comes from and where it should go — a concept I call the “boundary of information.”

    If you ask the Agent to generate a weekly report, it needs to know where to read this week’s task data. If you ask it to store a new idea, it needs to know which database to save it in. If every time you have to manually specify “read from this database” or “save to that database,” the use cost becomes far too high.

    And without clearly defined information boundaries, the answer quality will inevitably drop, because Notion Agent has access to a huge amount of workspace data.

    At the same time, we cannot predefine every possible rule in the Agent document, such as:
    “If the user asks A → read page X; if the user asks B → read page Y.”
    That would be exhausting to maintain and inflexible. So my solution is structured database design + scenario presets.

    For example, I have an Agent Scenario F that automatically generates daily, weekly, and monthly reports. The trigger keywords look like this:

    In the execution document for Scenario F, this is how I define the sources of information:

    With this setup, when I say “Generate this week’s report,” the Agent immediately knows:

    • where to query data (which specific databases)
    • what filtering conditions to apply
    • that it should not search unrelated pages or other databases

    Here is the query result:

    After retrieving the necessary information, I then tell the Agent how to process it:

    Following that, there are additional rules for analyzing and handling the data — but the core outcome remains the same:
    the Agent will automatically generate a complete, structured weekly or monthly report based on the predefined templates.

    This clear boundary-setting brings three major benefits:This kind of clearly defined boundary brings three benefits. First, the Agent will no longer wander aimlessly through your entire workspace — instead, it retrieves information precisely from the designated data sources. Second, clear data sources mean faster query speeds, without wasting time on irrelevant content. Most importantly, you always know where the Agent is pulling information from, making its behavior predictable and controllable. And if a result turns out to be suboptimal, you can quickly identify the issue — whether the data source itself is incomplete, or the Agent’s extraction logic needs adjustment.

    But all of this relies on one essential foundation: Your Notion workspace must be built on structured databases:

    • Tasks have a dedicated home
    • Notes are stored and categorized by type
    • Projects follow an organized hierarchy
    • Saved articles have a consistent clipping hub

    In other words: The power of Notion Agent depends entirely on the organizational strength of Notion itself. If your workspace is a mess, the Agent cannot perform well — no matter how advanced the model is. Most people find Notion AI “not useful” for two fundamental reasons: They don’t record enough information. Their workspace lacks structural clarity. Only when you have both rich content and a well-designed structure can Notion Agent unleash its full potential.

    Once we’ve solved where information comes from, the next step is to solve where information should go — using the same approach.

    If every interaction with the Agent still required you to manually specify which database to save into, which fields to fill, or which tags to set, the experience would be terrible, and true automation of information flow would never happen. So my solution remains: preset storage rules + intelligent field filling.

    The strength of Notion Agent lies in the fact that it can not only create pages inside databases, but also understand the structure of a database and intelligently populate its fields.

    Continuing the monthly report example:
    The Agent’s generated report doesn’t sit in the chat window waiting for me to manually copy it — it is automatically saved into “My Notes DB”, because in the workflow document I have already specified:

    1. The storage location for monthly reports
    2. The format template for monthly reports

    After accessing the “Notes Database,” the Agent interprets the semantics of its fields. It knows, for example:

    • Exp = experience review
    • Idea = inspiration
    • Log = log entry

    So the monthly report is automatically tagged as Exp. This semantic understanding is what makes the entire information flow truly automated.

    Looking back at the previous two sections: “Scene routing” solves how the Agent should think.
    “Information boundaries” solve where the Agent should look and where it should write. Only when these two are combined can the Agent be both smart enough to understand your intent and constrained enough to avoid mistakes.

    Behind both design principles is one shared philosophy: The more automated the system becomes, the more it needs clear boundaries. If you don’t constrain anything, the Agent’s behavior becomes unpredictable — you’ll never know where it will pull information from or where it will save the output. But once boundaries are clearly defined, the Agent becomes controllable and predictable, and debugging becomes easy.

    Of course, these boundaries are not permanent. As your workflow evolves, your database structures change, or you discover loopholes in certain scenarios, you can update the rules at any time simply through conversation. This “iterable rule system” allows Notion Agent to combine the reliability of structured systems with the flexibility of AI.

    Custom Agent

    This next part involves Notion’s upcoming Custom Agent feature, which has not yet been officially launched — and which I currently don’t have access to. So the following is based on publicly shared information, but enough to explain what it is and what it can enable.

    Everything discussed so far — scene routing, boundaries, document-as-rules — operates within the Personal Agent model. Meaning: the Agent only acts when you initiate the request. You must open Notion → open the AI panel → type the instruction → wait for the result.

    But Custom Agent attempts to answer a different question: Can an Agent run automatically in the background, without me manually triggering it each time?

    Imagine scenarios like:

    • 9 a.m. every morning — the Agent scans your task database and compiles a list of today’s due tasks, then pushes it to you
    • Friday afternoon — the Agent automatically reads this week’s completed tasks, generates a weekly report, and saves it in the designated database
    • Every weekend — the Agent crawls the web for the latest AI news and compiles a digest into your clipping database

    This is the core value of Custom Agent: upgrading from “you ask, it answers” to “it acts proactively.”

    Reviewing the Agent design principles introduced earlier, Custom Agent is essentially an extension of the same logic:

    1. The logic of scene routing still applies — except the trigger shifts from “keyword detection” to “time- or event-based triggers.”
    2. Information boundaries become even more important, because an autonomous Agent must know exactly where to read from and where to write to.
    3. The philosophy of “documents = rules” remains unchanged. You still define the Agent’s behavior by writing documents.

    If you are already using the Personal Agent and have built solid scene documents and information structures, upgrading to Custom Agent in the future will be extremely smooth: you only need to convert tasks that previously required manual triggering into automated triggers.

    In everyone’s workflow, there are countless repetitive, predictable tasks — daily summaries, weekly reports, data cleanup, information syncing, periodic reviews… None of these tasks are hard individually, but precisely because they’re easy, they are often delayed or forgotten. Custom Agent transforms these “should do” tasks into “automatically done” tasks, allowing your energy to focus on work that requires creativity.

    Of course, this also places higher demands on the organization of your Notion workspace. A messy, unstructured database cannot benefit from Custom Agent, no matter how powerful the feature is. So if you’re interested in this feature, now is the perfect time to start cleaning up your information structure and preparing for the future.

    Agent Design Template

    If you are completely new to this, the previous sections may feel scattered or complicated — but the core idea is actually very simple.

    A typical Agent document contains four basic modules: Identity & Mission , Interaction Style, Scenes & Trigger Words, Memory Area . You don’t need to write everything from day one. Start with one scenario you use the most, test it in practice, then gradually expand.

    There’s also a much easier way to get started — feed the AI with your past notes.

    Many people feel lost when facing an empty Agent document. They don’t know how to define their “identity,” describe their “style,” or articulate their “values.” But the truth is: you don’t need to invent these out of thin air. Just dump all your old notes, articles, project reviews, random thoughts — everything — into the AI. Let the AI analyze and extract patterns, then generate a profile of you. It can infer your communication style, areas of expertise, and the standards you use to judge good work — all from your writing.

    This is the idea of using existing material to bootstrap the new system, which makes starting effortless, fast, and — most importantly — authentic. Because the content is originally yours; the AI is only organizing it.

    This also highlights a deeper principle: In the AI era, recording is infrastructure. Only with a habit of documenting your work and thoughts can you provide material for the AI to analyze now. It’s never too late to start — you never know what new AI tools the future will bring. No matter how advanced models become, they are not mind readers; they still rely on the material you feed them. No input, no output.

    To help you get into this loop more quickly, I created a Notion Agent starter template that you can copy and use directly. Click here to get the template link.

    All you need to do is follow the structure and instructions in the template, start talking to your Agent, and then gradually adjust and refine it through real usage. Add new sub-documents, tweak trigger keywords, and supplement your own methodologies and preferences according to your work scenarios.

    Of course, if you want the Agent to perform at its full potential, a structured Notion workspace is a prerequisite. If you haven’t yet built your own information architecture — or you’re unsure how to organize tasks, projects, and notes — you can refer to my FLO.W template. It includes a clear pre-designed database structure: tasks, projects, notes, and saved items each have their own dedicated storage, and every field has been refined through repeated iterations so that the Agent can understand and use them right away. You won’t need to build your information system from scratch; the template itself is the foundation for unlocking Agent capabilities.

    This template has already been included in the Minority Co-Creation Project — you’re welcome to explore or purchase it:

    1. Minority Co-Creation — FLO.W Template Purchase
    2. Full workflow video walkthrough
    3. 10,000-word deep dive into the template’s underlying design principles

    Notion AI Subscription Recommendations

    Most of what Notion Agent can do has already been covered in the previous sections. But given how wildly diverse Notion’s capabilities are, I’ve also compiled a list of things that Notion Agent cannot do. You can refer to this link for the complete list. Before subscribing, you should review this document to evaluate whether it meets your needs.

    In addition, Notion’s official pricing strategy has already undergone one major adjustment. Now, if you want access to Notion’s AI features, you must subscribe to the Business or Enterprise plan. For personal users, the Business plan is sufficient — but the yearly cost of $240 is certainly not cheap. Therefore, my recommendation is: If you are new to Notion, do not subscribe to Notion AI right away. Instead, read my article 5 Beginner Tips for Notion first and see whether Notion’s way of capturing and organizing information feels natural to you. Only after you truly feel that Notion is a good tool for you should you consider subscribing.

    Some users may notice that they can still subscribe to Notion AI as an add-on while staying on the Plus plan. According to Notion, this policy applies only to legacy subscribers. As of May 2025, the AI add-on is no longer available for purchase by new users. This means only users who subscribed to the AI add-on before the policy change can continue using AI in this way. However, the AI features available via add-on are incomplete, and you will be missing several major capabilities:

    • AI Agent: A personal AI assistant capable of multi-step tasks
    • Enterprise search: Global search across workspaces and connected apps
    • AI meeting notes: Automated voice transcription and meeting summaries

    Also important: Once you cancel the AI add-on, you cannot re-enable it. You will only be able to regain full AI functionality by upgrading to the Business or Enterprise plans.

    Conclusion

    Most people’s relationship with AI still stays at the stage of “open a chat window when I have a question”: use it, leave it, and come back next time as strangers again.

    But Notion Agent gives me a different possibility: AI is no longer an external tool, but a collaborator that can be trained, shaped, and grown alongside you. It won’t keep asking, “What format would you like?” because it already remembers your preferences. It won’t wander aimlessly around your workspace, because you’ve already told it where to look and where to store things. It feels almost magical — like training an assistant who becomes more and more in sync with you over time.

    Of course, all of this only happens if you’re willing to invest time to build, refine, and iterate this system — and more importantly, if you’re willing to get your hands dirty and record things honestly. Notion Agent is not plug-and-play magic. It requires you to think clearly about how you work, and express those rules in documents. This process itself becomes a form of self-reflection; you’ll discover habits and preferences you never realized before.

    This leads to another point I want to emphasize: as the performance gap between AI models shrinks, what truly determines output quality is the input you give them.

    And “input” does not mean the overwhelming flood of second-hand information everywhere on the internet. It is not clipping other people’s articles or collecting other people’s ideas — those might even be AI-generated leftovers. The inputs that matter are your own:
    your biases, your ignorance, your narrow perspective, your clumsy processes, the wrong turns you’ve taken, and the mistakes you’ve made.

    Only when you honestly record these “imperfections” can AI truly help you. Because then it is no longer looking at generic, mass-produced correct answers — it’s seeing your unique thinking patterns. It learns your real confusion through your mistakes, understands your real needs through your preferences, and recognizes your true standards through the revisions you make again and again.

    That’s why I strongly disagree with the “AI era makes note-taking useless” argument. To me, that is resignation in the face of technological change — an excuse for laziness. No technological revolution can replace independent thinking. AI can execute, organize, accelerate — but it will never decide for you what you actually want.

    The greatest value of Notion Agent, to me, is that once I saw the huge potential of automated workflows and the clear path to building them, I realized I truly couldn’t delay any longer. I must seriously rethink my workflows:

    • What repetitive processes are draining my time?
    • How can those be optimized or automated?
    • What can be redesigned so I can get more done with the same time?

    Once I think through these questions — that is when Notion Agent becomes powerful.

    Lastly, this article was originally planned to include comparisons with Obsidian’s AI plugins and Heptabase’s newly redesigned AI (several iterations in), and also dig deeper into the current limitations of Notion AI. But since this article is already over ten thousand words, I’ll save those topics for next time.

    If there is anything specific you’d like me to cover, feel free to leave a comment — I will evaluate it and consider including it in upcoming articles.

  • Using AI to Clear My Xiaohongshu Favorites: How I Automatically Sorted 1,000+ Saved Posts into Notion

    Using AI to Clear My Xiaohongshu Favorites: How I Automatically Sorted 1,000+ Saved Posts into Notion

    The Pain Point Behind Xiaohongshu Favorites

    My wife is a typical heavy Xiaohongshu user. She has more than 1,000 saved posts—makeup tutorials, outfit ideas, travel routes… you name it.

    A while ago, she decided to finally organize her Favorites. But the moment she opened the first page, she froze—those thousand-plus posts spanned every possible topic, with no groups and no structure. Manually sorting them into folders would be a nightmare.

    She started by creating 37 collections and began moving posts into them. After sorting about twenty-something posts, she understandably gave up the next day. Watching her workflow, I realized the real issue—this is exactly the kind of repetitive task AI should handle, not humans.

    So I built a small tool that automatically classifies her 1,400 saved posts and syncs them into Notion.

    How AI Classification Works

    The general idea is to use each Xiaohongshu post’s title + content + tags as part of a prompt, together with all predefined categories (e.g., travel, movies, makeup, outfits), and let the AI return the most suitable category.

    Because Xiaohongshu’s web version doesn’t allow assigning posts to collections via automation, we need to save both the post data and AI-generated category into our own database—in this case, Notion, which is great for building a personal knowledge base.

    • A simple breakdown of the steps:
    • Call Xiaohongshu’s web API to fetch post content (using a browser extension to access the web interface).
    • Create your own categories inside Notion (the more detailed, the better).
    • Feed the content + full category list to the AI; the AI API returns the best-fit category.
    • Save both the post content and the AI-assigned category into Notion.

    Plugin Usage

    After installing the plugin, follow the steps to fill in your Notion configuration. A detailed setup guide is available here. The plugin will copy a customized Xiaohongshu Knowledge Base template into your Notion workspace:

    In the Xiaohongshu Knowledge Base template, find the “Categories” section and add all the categories you need, as shown below:

    Then go to the plugin settings page. You’ll need to provide your own API key for the AI model. Once the key is configured, start AI classification:

    Return to the sync page, authorize Xiaohongshu, click “Start Sync,” and the plugin will automatically save both the posts and their assigned categories to Notion.

    Final Result

    All post pages:

    Category view in Notion:

    Once auto-classification is enabled, the entire workflow requires zero manual operation—just start the task once and let the system run. Within two days, all 1,400 Xiaohongshu posts were automatically categorized and synced into Notion, with additional support for pinning, playback, note-taking, multi-tag management, and more—done in one go.

    If you were to manually categorize 1,400+ posts, even at 30 seconds per post, you’d need at least 11.7 hours of repetitive work. Now, with just a 10-minute one-time setup, the system handles everything else. You save 95% of your time and gain a 100× efficiency boost.

    Related Links:

    Tool Access
    Detailed Setup Guide