How to Cite AI Tools in APA and MLA, With Examples

To cite an AI tool in APA 7, credit the company that made it as the author, give the year, italicise the tool or chat title, add a bracketed description such as [Large language model], and end with the URL. In MLA 9, the tool is never the author: you describe the prompt or output in the title position, name the tool as the container, then add version, company, date and URL. In both styles you also tell the reader, in your text, what you used the tool for.

Below are complete examples, the in-text forms, and the mistakes that cost marks. If you first need to know whether your course allows AI at all and how to disclose it, read AI disclosure and citation for students; this post is only about getting the citation format right.

Before you cite: check which guidance your course follows

Both APA and MLA have published official guidance, and APA updated its own in 2025. Some universities and departments also publish local versions that take priority over the style manual. So check your course handbook or library citation guide first. If it says nothing, use the official guidance below.

Keep a record as you work: the tool name, the model if shown, the date, your prompt, and a share link to the chat if the tool offers one.

How to cite AI in APA 7

The APA Style team's 2025 post, Citing generative AI in APA Style: Reference formats, gives two reference formats. Which one you use depends on whether readers need to see one specific conversation or just know which tool you used.

Format 1: a specific chat with a share link

Template:

Company. (Year, Month Day). Title of chat [Generative AI chat]. Tool or model name. URL of the shared chat

Example (illustrative; your title, date and link will differ):

OpenAI. (2026, October 14). Explaining inflation targeting for a first-year economics essay [Generative AI chat]. ChatGPT. https://chatgpt.com/share/your-link-id

The date is the day the chat happened. Many tools let you rename a shared chat, and APA suggests giving it a descriptive title before you create the reference, because that title becomes the italicised title in your entry.

Format 2: the tool in general

Use this when you used a tool for editing, translation, code or similar work and no single chat matters to the reader. Template:

Company. (Year). Tool or Model Name [Large language model]. URL of the tool

Examples from APA's post:

• OpenAI. (2025). ChatGPT [Large language model]. https://chatgpt.com/
• Google. (2025). Gemini 2.5 Flash [Large language model]. https://gemini.google.com

Here the year is the year the tool was most recently updated. APA no longer recommends version numbers by default; include the model name if it is available, and add a version in parentheses only if the tool shows one.

APA in-text citations

• Parenthetical: (OpenAI, 2026)
• Narrative: OpenAI (2026) ...

APA's original guide, How to cite ChatGPT, adds three points students often miss. First, describe how you used the tool in your method section, or in the introduction of an essay or literature review. Second, when you quote output, give the prompt too, so the reader knows what produced the text. Third, AI output is not a personal communication, because no person communicated with you, so do not use that citation type. Long responses can go in an appendix, which you mention in the text, for example (OpenAI, 2026; see Appendix A).

How to cite AI in MLA 9

The MLA Style Center's guide, How do I cite generative AI in MLA style?, uses MLA's normal template of core elements. It explicitly recommends against treating the AI tool as an author, so the entry starts with a description of what was generated.

The MLA works-cited entry

Template:

"Description of the prompt or output" prompt. Name of AI Tool, version, Company, Day Month Year generated, URL.

The element-by-element logic from the MLA guide:

• Title of source: describe what the tool generated; you can include your prompt here.
• Container: the name of the tool, in italics, such as ChatGPT.
• Version: as specific as the tool lets you be.
• Publisher: the company that made the tool.
• Date: the date the content was generated.
• Location: the general URL of the tool, or a unique share link if there is one.

Example (illustrative):

"Explain the difference between primary and secondary data in 100 words" prompt. ChatGPT, GPT-5 version, OpenAI, 14 Oct. 2026, chatgpt.com.

MLA in-text citations

Because there is no author, the in-text citation uses a shortened form of the title element, usually the first few words of the prompt description: ("Explain the difference"). It must match the start of your works-cited entry.

The MLA guide also says to cite the tool whenever you paraphrase, quote or incorporate content it created, and to acknowledge functional uses such as editing or translating in a note or in your text. MLA published an update to this guidance in 2025, so if your entry looks unusual, check the latest version on the Style Center page.

Before and after: fixing a weak citation

Before: "According to ChatGPT, remittances make up a large share of household income in rural areas (ChatGPT, 2026)."

Three problems: the tool is treated as the author, there is no prompt, and a factual claim rests on AI output that nobody checked.

After (APA): "When asked to 'list the main sources of rural household income in Bangladesh', ChatGPT listed remittances first (OpenAI, 2026; see Appendix B). I checked this against an official household survey, which I cite separately."

The after version credits the company, shows the prompt, points to the full transcript, and moves the factual weight onto a real source. That last step matters most. Both style guides treat AI output as something you used, not as evidence. MLA's guide specifically warns that AI tools may cite sources that do not exist, so check every reference before you rely on it. Our guide on catching fabricated AI citations shows how.

Common mistakes that cost marks

• Listing ChatGPT as the author. In APA the author is the company; in MLA there is no author element at all.
• Citing it as a personal communication in APA. APA says not to.
• Using the date you wrote the essay instead of the date of the chat (APA specific chat, MLA) or the tool's update year (APA tool in general).
• Citing the AI for a fact. Find and cite the original source instead.
• Citing but not disclosing. A reference entry does not explain how you used the tool. Your course may require a separate statement.

FAQs

Do I need to cite AI if I only used it for grammar checking?

It depends on your course rules. MLA asks you to acknowledge functional uses like editing in a note or in your text, and APA suggests describing such uses in your method section or author note. Check your assignment brief, which may have its own requirement.

What if the AI tool does not give me a share link?

In APA, use the general tool format with the tool's main URL, and put the prompt and relevant output in an appendix if readers need it. In MLA, use the general URL of the tool, which the MLA guide allows.

Can I cite Gemini, Claude or Copilot the same way?

Yes. The structure stays the same; only the company, tool name and URL change. For Gemini, for example, the APA author is Google.

Should I put my full prompt in the reference list?

In APA, no: APA's 2025 guidance says prompts go in your text or an appendix, not in the reference. In MLA, the prompt or a description of it sits in the title position of the works-cited entry.

Will citing AI properly stop my work from being flagged by a detector?

No. Citation and detection are separate issues. Citing correctly shows honesty about your process; it does not change what any detector reports, and no editing service can guarantee a detector result either.

Need a second pair of eyes?

If you have a thesis, assignment or research paper with AI-assisted parts, a careful human edit can check that your citations, references and disclosure are consistent and that the writing reads in your own voice. See our academic services and pricing, or try the free 300-word trial first, with no card needed. We never promise a detector score; we help you submit clear, honest, correctly referenced work.