Explain a complex concept like I'm five
A genuine ELI5 replaces the concept's own vocabulary entirely, not just shortens the sentences describing it.
- Use it for
- Anyone who wants a genuinely simple, jargon-free first foothold on a complex topic before going any deeper.
A genuine "explain like I'm five" request asks for something more specific than a shorter or simpler-sounding explanation — it asks for the concept's own technical vocabulary to be replaced entirely with everyday language and a concrete, relatable analogy, which is a different and harder task than just trimming sentence length. This prompt builds that genuinely simplified version, checked against whether it actually avoids the field's own jargon.
When not to use this
If you already have solid background in the topic's field, a genuine ELI5 will feel too basic and slow — a normal explanation pitched at your actual level will serve you better.
Fill in
Explain this to me like I'm five years old, with zero background in
the topic: {{topic}}
Use an analogy involving everyday, familiar things, and avoid the
field's own technical vocabulary entirely — if a term from the field
is unavoidable, explain it in plain language the moment it's used.Why it works
Explicitly requiring the field's own vocabulary to be avoided, not just sentences to be shorter, is what produces a genuine ELI5 instead of a slightly-simplified version that still assumes background knowledge — a shorter explanation using the same jargon is still opaque to someone with zero background in the field.
Common mistakes
- ×Accepting an explanation that's shorter but still relies on the field's own technical terms.
- ×Choosing an analogy that itself requires specialized knowledge to understand.
Follow-ups
- That clicked — now give me the slightly more detailed version, one level up from ELI5.
- Explain this related concept the same way: {{related_topic}}.
Did this work?
Someone with zero background in the topic could follow the explanation and repeat back the core idea in their own words afterward.
Tested on claude-opus-5. Evidence status is draft; it moves to battle-tested only on recorded runs, never by hand.