prompt-engineering
Skill169 starsChanged 56 days agoMITView on GitHub
Universal prompt engineering techniques for any LLM. Use when crafting, optimizing, or reviewing prompts for AI models. Triggers on requests like "improve this prompt", "write a system prompt", "optimize my instructions", "help me prompt engineer", "audit this prompt", "review my prompt", or when building agentic systems that need structured prompts.
85 other projects use a version of this, 1 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- ishandutta2007/Awesome-Claude-Skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- kazemcodes/skill-treetheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- MMACABRE/SKILLStheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- Hoerire/Azurtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- Bruno-Cunha-Souza/ValarMindSkillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- LuisSambrano/antigravity-configtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use security-checklist, multi-agent-orchestration and 10 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
atuljha23Skillsecurity-checklist
OWASP-style quick reference — authn/authz, injection, secrets, sessions, crypto, dependencies. Use during code review and before committing security-sensitive changes.
Also in 3 projects that use this
javalenciacaiSkillmulti-agent-orchestration
Design and coordinate multi-agent systems where specialized agents work together to solve complex problems. Covers agent communication, task delegation, workflow orchestration, and result aggregation. Use when building coordinated agent teams, complex workflows, or systems requiring specialized expertise across domains.
Also in 4 projects that use this
xfstudioSkillllm-evaluation
Implement comprehensive evaluation strategies for LLM applications using automated metrics, human feedback, and benchmarking. Use when testing LLM performance, measuring AI application quality, or establishing evaluation frameworks.
Also in 3 projects that use this
GoogleSkillcoding-principles
Enforces engineering, architecture, public API, and code quality standards distilled from human reviewer feedback across A2UI pull requests. Use when authoring new code, refactoring, addressing review feedback, or reviewing PR diffs. Don't use for release publishing or spec blueprint generation without code or PR changes.
Also in 3 projects that use this
pproencaSkillrefactoring
Code refactoring best practices based on Martin Fowler's catalog and Clean Code principles. This skill should be used when refactoring existing code, improving code structure, reducing complexity, eliminating code smells, or reviewing code for maintainability. Triggers on tasks involving extract method, rename, decompose conditional, reduce coupling, or improve readability.
Also in 6 projects that use this
mjunaidcaSkilltool-design
Design tools that agents can use effectively. Use when creating new tools for agents, debugging tool-related failures, or optimizing existing tool sets.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions85 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 1
- CodeAlive-AI/ceo-ai-os★ 997% same
Wrote their own version · 84
- trycompai/comp★ 2.1ksame name
- niki914/zafiro★ 346same name
- grandamenium/cortextos★ 106same name
- nahid-sparktales/agent-dispatcher★ 59same name
- geekatron/jerry★ 37same name
- Bbar0n234/learnflow-ai★ 35same name
- nimadorostkar/Claude-Skills-collection★ 33same name
- sabahattink/antigravity-fullstack-hq★ 30same name
- VoDaiLocz/kilo-kit-mcp★ 28same name
- ishandutta2007/Awesome-Claude-Skills★ 16same name
74 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository23 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- agentic-readinessSkill
- bug-fix-protocolSkill
- clipboardSkill
- code-that-fits-in-your-headSkill
- fetch-url-as-markdownSkill
- fpf-problem-solvingSkill
- hooks-managementSkill
- installing-cli-toolsSkill
- investigating-repository-historySkill
- maintaining-macos-healthSkill
- maintaining-windows-healthSkill
- mcp-managementSkill
- plan-modeSkill
- plugins-managementSkill
- refactoring-csharpSkill
- repo-activity-summarySkill
- semantic-scholar-deepSkill
- settings-managementSkill
- skills-managementSkill
- ubiquitous-languageSkill
- windows-qa-engineerSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 75 edited versions we read keep these.
3
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 14
Use XML tags to create clear, parseable prompts:
- Very specific: line 33
Use consistent tag names throughout (<instructions>, not sometimes <steps>)
- Distinctive: line 197
When adapting prompts across models or versions:
- Distinctive: line 263
When asked to audit, review, or improve a prompt, follow this workflow.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 75 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Prompt Engineering
Universal techniques for crafting effective prompts across any LLM.
Core Principles
1. Structure with XML Tags
Use XML tags to create clear, parseable prompts:
<context>Background information here</context>
<instructions>
1. First step
2. Second step
</instructions>
<examples>Sample inputs/outputs</examples>
<output_format>Expected structure</output_format>Benefits:
- Clarity: Separates context, instructions, and examples
- Accuracy: Prevents model from mixing up sections
- Flexibility: Easy to modify individual parts
- Parseability: Enables structured output extraction
Best practices:
- Use consistent tag names throughout (
<instructions>, not sometimes<steps>) - Reference tags explicitly: "Using the data in
<context>tags..." - Nest tags for hierarchy:
<examples><example id="1">...</example></examples> - Combine with other techniques:
<thinking>for chain-of-thought,<answer>for final output
2. Control Output Shape
Specify explicit constraints on length, format, and structure:
<output_spec>
- Default: 3-6 sentences or ≤5 bullets
- Simple yes/no questions: ≤2 sentences
- Complex multi-step tasks:
- 1 short overview paragraph
- ≤5 bullets: What changed, Where, Risks, Next steps, Open questions
- Use Markdown with headers, bullets, tables when helpful
- Avoid long narrative paragraphs; prefer compact structure
</output_spec>3. Prevent Scope Drift
Explicitly constrain what the model should NOT do:
<constraints>
- Implement EXACTLY and ONLY what is requested
- No extra features, components, or embellishments
- If ambiguous, choose the simplest valid interpretation
- Do NOT invent values, make assumptions, or add unrequested elements
</constraints>4. Handle Ambiguity Explicitly
Prevent hallucinations and overconfidence:
<uncertainty_handling>
- If the question is ambiguous:
- Ask 1-3 precise clarifying questions, OR
- Present 2-3 plausible interpretations with labeled assumptions
- When facts may have changed: answer in general terms, state uncertainty
- Never fabricate exact figures or references when uncertain
- Prefer "Based on the provided context..." over absolute claims
</uncertainty_handling>5. Long-Context Grounding
For inputs >10k tokens, add re-grounding instructions:
<long_context_handling>
- First, produce a short internal outline of key sections relevant to the request
- Re-state user constraints explicitly before answering
- Anchor claims to sections ("In the 'Data Retention' section...")
- Quote or paraphrase fine details (dates, thresholds, clauses)
</long_context_handling>Agentic Prompts
Tool Usage Rules
<tool_usage>
- Prefer tools over internal knowledge for:
- Fresh or user-specific data (tickets, orders, configs)
- Specific IDs, URLs, or document references
- Parallelize independent reads when possible
- After write operations, restate: what changed, where, any validation performed
</tool_usage>User Updates
<user_updates>
- Send brief updates (1-2 sentences) only when:
- Starting a new major phase
- Discovering something that changes the plan
- Avoid narrating routine operations
- Each update must include a concrete outcome ("Found X", "Updated Y")
- Do not expand scope beyond what was asked
</user_updates>Self-Check for High-Risk Outputs
<self_check>
Before finalizing answers in sensitive contexts (legal, financial, safety):
- Re-scan for unstated assumptions
- Check for ungrounded numbers or claims
- Soften overly strong language ("always", "guaranteed")
- Explicitly state assumptions
</self_check>Structured Extraction
For data extraction tasks, always provide a schema:
<extraction_spec>
Extract data into this exact schema (no extra fields):
{
"field_name": "string",
"optional_field": "string | null",
"numeric_field": "number | null"
}
- If a field is not present in source, set to null (don't guess)
- Re-scan source for missed fields before returning
</extraction_spec>Web Research Prompts
<research_guidelines>
- Browse the web for: time-sensitive topics, recommendations, navigational queries, ambiguous terms
- Include citations after paragraphs with web-derived claims
- Use multiple sources for key claims; prioritize primary sources
- Research until additional searching won't materially change the answer
- Structure output with Markdown: headers, bullets, tables for comparisons
</research_guidelines>Example: Before/After
Without structure:
You're a financial analyst. Generate a Q2 report for investors. Include Revenue, Margins, Cash Flow. Use this data: {{DATA}}. Make it professional and concise.With structure:
You're a financial analyst at AcmeCorp generating a Q2 report for investors.
<context>
AcmeCorp is a B2B SaaS company. Investors value transparency and actionable insights.
</context>
<data>
{{DATA}}
</data>
<instructions>
1. Include sections: Revenue Growth, Profit Margins, Cash Flow
2. Highlight strengths and areas for improvement
3. Use concise, professional tone
</instructions>
<output_format>
- Use bullet points with metrics and YoY changes
- Include "Action:" items for areas needing improvement
- End with 2-3 bullet Outlook section
</output_format>Prompt Migration Checklist
When adapting prompts across models or versions:
- Switch model, keep prompt identical — isolate the variable
- Pin reasoning/thinking depth to match prior model's profile
- Run evals — if results are good, ship
- If regressions, tune prompt — adjust verbosity/format/scope constraints
- Re-eval after each small change — one change at a time
Quick Reference
| Technique | Tag Pattern | Use Case |
| Separate sections | <context>, <instructions>, <data> | Any complex prompt |
| Control length | <output_spec> with word/bullet limits | Prevent verbosity |
| Prevent drift | <constraints> with explicit "do NOT" | Feature creep |
| Handle uncertainty | <uncertainty_handling> | Factual queries |
| Chain of thought | <thinking>, <answer> | Reasoning tasks |
| Extraction | <schema> with JSON structure | Data parsing |
| Research | <research_guidelines> | Web-enabled agents |
| Self-check | <self_check> | High-risk domains |
| Tool usage | <tool_usage_rules> | Agentic systems |
| Eagerness control | <persistence>, <context_gathering> | Agent autonomy |
| Persona | <role> + behavioral constraints | Tone & style |
Prompting Techniques Catalog
Comprehensive catalog of prompting techniques. Full details, examples, and academic references in references/prompting-techniques.md.
| Technique | Use Case |
| Zero-Shot Prompting | Direct task execution without examples; classification, translation, summarization |
| Few-Shot Prompting | In-context learning via exemplars; format control, label calibration, style matching |
| Chain-of-Thought (CoT) | Step-by-step reasoning; arithmetic, logic, commonsense reasoning tasks |
| Meta Prompting | LLM as orchestrator delegating to specialized expert prompts; complex multi-domain tasks |
| Self-Consistency | Sample multiple CoT paths, pick majority answer; boost accuracy on math & reasoning |
| Generated Knowledge | Generate relevant knowledge first, then answer; commonsense & factual QA |
| Prompt Chaining | Break complex tasks into sequential subtasks; document analysis, multi-step workflows |
| Tree of Thoughts (ToT) | Explore multiple reasoning branches with lookahead/backtracking; planning, puzzles |
| RAG | Retrieve external documents before generating; knowledge-intensive tasks, fresh data |
| ART (Auto Reasoning + Tools) | Auto-select and orchestrate tools with CoT; tasks requiring calculation, search, APIs |
| APE (Auto Prompt Engineer) | LLM generates and scores candidate prompts; prompt optimization at scale |
| Active-Prompt | Identify uncertain examples, annotate selectively for CoT; adaptive few-shot |
| Directional Stimulus | Add a hint/keyword to guide generation direction; summarization, dialogue |
| PAL (Program-Aided LM) | Generate code instead of text for reasoning; math, data manipulation, symbolic tasks |
| ReAct | Interleave reasoning traces with tool actions; search, QA, decision-making agents |
| Reflexion | Agent self-reflects on failures with verbal feedback; iterative improvement, debugging |
| Multimodal CoT | Two-stage: rationale generation then answer with text+image; visual reasoning tasks |
| Graph Prompting | Structured graph-based prompts; node classification, relation extraction, graph tasks |
Prompting Fundamentals
LLM settings, prompt elements, formatting, and practical examples — see references/prompting-introduction.md. Covers:
- LLM Settings — temperature, top-p, max length, stop sequences, frequency/presence penalties
- Prompt Elements — instruction, context, input data, output indicator
- Design Tips — start simple, be specific, avoid impreciseness, say what TO do (not what NOT to do)
- Task Examples — summarization, extraction, QA, classification, conversation, code generation, reasoning
Risks & Misuses
Adversarial attacks, factuality issues, and bias mitigation — see references/prompting-risks.md. Covers:
- Adversarial Prompting — prompt injection, prompt leaking, jailbreaking (DAN, Waluigi Effect), defense tactics
- Factuality — ground truth grounding, calibrated confidence, admit-ignorance patterns
- Biases — exemplar distribution skew, exemplar ordering effects, balanced few-shot design
Prompt Audit / Review
When asked to audit, review, or improve a prompt, follow this workflow. Full checklist with per-check references: prompt-audit-checklist.md.
Workflow
- Read the prompt fully — identify its purpose, target model, and deployment context (interactive chat, agentic system, batch pipeline, RAG-augmented)
- Walk 8 dimensions — check each, note issues with severity (Critical / Warning / Suggestion):
| # | Dimension | What to Check |
| 1 | Clarity & Specificity | Task definition, success criteria, audience, output format, conflicting constraints |
| 2 | Structure & Formatting | Section separation (XML tags), prompt smells (monolithic, mixed layers, negative bias) |
| 3 | Safety & Security | Control/data separation, secrets in prompt, injection resilience, tool permissions |
| 4 | Hallucination & Factuality | Role framing, grounding, citation-without-sources, uncertainty handling |
| 5 | Context Management | Info placement (not buried in middle), context size, RAG doc count, re-grounding |
| 6 | Maintainability & Debt | Hardcoded values, regenerated logic, model pinning, testability |
| 7 | Model-Specific Fit | Model-specific params and gotchas (see Model-Specific Guides below) |
| 8 | Evaluation Readiness | Eval criteria, adversarial test cases, schema enforcement, monitoring |
- Produce a report — issues table (dimension, check, severity, issue, fix) + rewritten prompt or targeted fix suggestions. Use the report template from the checklist reference.
- For each issue, cite the relevant reference file so the user can dive deeper.
Quick Decision: Which Dimensions to Prioritize
- User-facing chatbot → prioritize Safety (#3), Hallucination (#4), Clarity (#1)
- Agentic system with tools → prioritize Safety (#3), Context (#5), Maintainability (#6)
- Batch/pipeline → prioritize Structure (#2), Evaluation (#8), Maintainability (#6)
- RAG-augmented → prioritize Context (#5), Safety (#3), Hallucination (#4)
Common Mistakes & Anti-Patterns
Three complementary layers — use the one matching your need:
Deep-dives by category — root causes, mechanisms, prevention checklists (from "The Architecture of Instruction", 2026):
| Mistake Category | Key Issues | Reference |
| Hallucinations & Logic | Ambiguity-induced confabulation, automation bias, overloaded prompts, logical failures in verification tasks, no role framing | mistakes-hallucinations.md |
| Structural Fragility | Formatting sensitivity (up to 76pp variance), reproducibility crisis, prompt smells catalog (6 anti-patterns), deliberation ladder | mistakes-structure.md |
| Context Rot | "Lost in the middle" U-shaped attention, RAG over-retrieval, naive data loading, context engineering shift | mistakes-context.md |
| Prompt Debt | Token tax of regenerative code, debt taxonomy (prompt/hyperparameter/framework/cost), multi-agent solutions, automated repair | mistakes-debt.md |
| Security | Direct/indirect injection, jailbreaking, system prompt leakage (OWASP LLM07:2025), RAG poisoning, multimodal injection, adversarial suffixes | mistakes-security.md |
Quick reference — 18-category taxonomy with MRPs, risk scores, case studies, action items: failure-taxonomy.md. Start here for an overview or to prioritize which categories to address first. Covers: control-plane vs data-plane model, heuristic risk scoring, real-world incidents (EchoLeak CVE-2025-32711, Mata v. Avianca, Samsung shadow AI).
How to measure & test — eval metrics, CI gating, red-teaming, tooling: evaluation-redteaming.md. Covers: TruthfulQA, FActScore, SelfCheckGPT, PromptBench, AILuminate, LLM-as-judge pitfalls, guardrail libraries, open research questions.
Model-Specific Guides
Each model family has unique parameters, gotchas, and patterns. Consult the reference for your target model:
- Claude Family — Claude 4.x family defaults, parameters, tools, and migration patterns
- Claude Fable 5.1 — five-level effort calibration, progress-update blocks, parallel tools, append-only history, completion and scope control, targeted edits, long-output budgeting, subagents, vision, and refusal handling
- Claude Fable 5 — always-on adaptive thinking, lean instruction design, long-run progress grounding, action boundaries, memory, and migration notes
- GPT-6 Astra — initiative, instruction hierarchy, writing style, subagent calibration, verification scope, async tools, mid-turn steering, effort changes, and migration constraints
- GPT-5 Family — GPT-5 / 5.1 / 5.2 / 5.4 / 5.5:
reasoning_effort,text.verbosity, named tools, agentic prompting, completeness/verification contracts, compaction, and migration paths - GPT-5.6 Sol — lean outcome-first prompts, autonomy boundaries,
maxeffort and Pro mode, Programmatic Tool Calling, persisted reasoning, explicit caching, retrieval budgets, long-running state, frontend and visual verification, and migration workflow - Gemini 3 Family — Gemini 2.5/3/3.1: temperature MUST be 1.0,
thinking_budgetvsthinking_level, constraint placement (end of prompt), persona priority, function calling, structured output, multimodal, image generation - GPT-5.2 Specifics — Compaction API code examples, web research agent prompt, full XML specification blocks
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

