prompt-creator
Skill0 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Create prompts that pass prompt-review's five gates by construction — intent capture, slash-command naming, single-workflow scope, draft as numbered steps, dogfood self-review. Use when authoring a new prompt, refactoring an existing one, or promoting a Mall prompt into the heir's brain.
7 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- WiseWong6/wise-skillstheir own version, first seen Aug 18, 2026
- Jonfr0/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Aug 13, 2026
- TheYMK/agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Jun 15, 2026
- codebyalexx/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen May 25, 2026
- weiambt/prompt-creator-skilltheir own version, first seen May 9, 2026
- TheWatcher01/skillstheir own version, first seen Apr 1, 2026
Other versions7 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 7
- WiseWong6/wise-skills★ 10same name
- skizha/agent-skills★ 3same name
- weiambt/prompt-creator-skill★ 2same name
- Jonfr0/claude-skills★ 1same name
- codebyalexx/claude-skills★ 0same name
- TheWatcher01/skills★ 0same name
- TheYMK/agent-skills★ 0same name
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 repository38 other files it gives its agents.
- .github/copilot-instructions.mdCopilot instructions
- agent-creatorSkill
- agent-reviewSkill
- ai-memory-setupSkill
- alex-banner-generationSkill
- anti-hallucinationSkill
- brain-auditSkill
- browser-toolsSkill
- code-reviewSkill
- creative-writingSkill
- critical-thinkingSkill
- deep-reviewSkill
- doc-hygieneSkill
- docx-to-mdSkill
- git-workflowSkill
- greeting-checkinSkill
- html-to-mdSkill
- humanizerSkill
- instruction-creatorSkill
- instruction-reviewSkill
- lint-clean-markdownSkill
- markdown-mermaidSkill
- markdown-sanitization-chainSkill
- md-to-emlSkill
- md-to-htmlSkill
- md-to-txtSkill
- md-to-wordSkill
- meditationSkill
- planSkill
- problem-framing-auditSkill
- prompt-reviewSkill
- security-and-hardeningSkill
- skill-creatorSkill
- skill-reviewSkill
- spikeSkill
- status-reportingSkill
- systematic-debuggingSkill
- test-driven-developmentSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 5 edited versions we read keep these.
2
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 46
If another prompt covers the same workflow, extend it.
- Very specific: line 112
Before committing, run prompt-review's five gates.
- Distinctive: line 132
No new prompts authored via this guide in 90 days (decorative — sunset)
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 5 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
<!-- intentional divergence from Supervisor: Edition strips Supervisor-only routing tables (curation-only vs. mirror split) and uses heir-portable phrasing ("into the heir's brain"). Same five gates. Audited 2026-05-31. -->Prompt Creator
Author prompts that pass prompt-review's five gates by construction. The gates are the quality bar; invert them, and you build to standard the first time.
Mirrors skill-creator's seven-phase structure with prompt-specific guidance. If a phase here disagrees with skill-creator on the shared scaffold, skill-creator wins; this file owns only the per-type guidance.
When to Use
- Authoring a new prompt in
.github/prompts/ - Refactoring an existing prompt (rename, scope tighten, step revision)
- Promoting a Mall prompt into your heir's brain
When not to use
- Authoring a skill (the procedure body) → use skill-creator. Prompts are entry-points; skills are bodies.
- Authoring an instruction (always-on or pattern-applied rule) → use instruction-creator
- Authoring an agent (delegated sub-process role) → use agent-creator
The Seven Phases
Each phase inverts one of the five gates. Author against the phase, pass the gate.
Phase 1 — Intent capture
Answer in writing before any drafting:
- What workflow does this kick off? One sentence. If it contains "and" / "+", you have two prompts — split.
- What slash-command does the user type? The filename (minus
.prompt.md) becomes/<name>. Pick something a user would intuitively type./review-instructiongood;/v2-thing-dobad. - What skill does this prompt invoke? Most prompts are thin wrappers that call a skill. If the answer is "no skill, the prompt carries the workflow", stop — author the skill first, then the prompt.
Phase 2 — Prior-art scan
Get-ChildItem .github/prompts/*.prompt.md
Select-String -Path .github/prompts/*.prompt.md -Pattern "<keyword>"If another prompt covers the same workflow, extend it. If a Mall prompt covers it, adopt.
Phase 3 — Draft against Gate 1 (Spec)
Frontmatter template:
---
description: "<third-person, what + when to invoke, ≤1024 chars>"
lastReviewed: YYYY-MM-DD
---Do NOT add mode: agent — per current Microsoft Learn prompt-files spec, this field is deprecated. Existing prompts may carry it during sweep transition; new prompts should not.
File location: .github/prompts/<kebab-name>.prompt.md (flat — no subfolders).
Slash-picker discoverability: the filename IS the user's typing surface. After you pick a name, mentally type /<name> and ask: would a user trying to find this workflow guess that string? If not, rename.
Phase 4 — Draft against Gate 2 (Quality)
| Criterion | How you author for it |
| Imperative voice | Verbs in the imperative ("Run", "Read", "Apply", "Save"). |
| Numbered steps | The prompt's body is a numbered step list. Brief context paragraph allowed before the steps; nothing else. |
| Single workflow scope | One goal. No "menus" of unrelated commands. |
| ≤100 lines | If you need more, the workflow belongs in a skill the prompt invokes. |
| Falsifier | Prompts <30 lines may inline a one-line falsifier; longer prompts need an explicit ## Would Revise If section. |
Template structure:
---
description: "..."
lastReviewed: YYYY-MM-DD
---
# /<prompt-name>
<one-paragraph context: what skill this invokes, what the user gets>
Steps:
1. <imperative action>
2. <imperative action>
3. <imperative action>
<optional: conditions / branches / output format>Phase 5 — Draft against Gate 3 (Scope)
| Target | Route |
| Generic developer workflow (status, save-note, banner) | Heir baseline |
| Project-specific workflow | That project's local-only repo |
| External-surface command | Not an ACT prompt — author a Mall unit |
Workflow vs body distinction: the prompt invokes the skill; the skill carries the procedure. If your prompt body has more than ~10 numbered steps, it's drifting into skill territory.
Phase 6 — Draft against Gate 4 (Safety)
Same checks as skill-creator Phase 6. Prompt-specific: if the workflow invokes destructive operations (force-push, drop, delete), the step list must include an explicit user-confirmation step before the destructive call.
Phase 7 — Dogfood self-audit
Before committing, run prompt-review's five gates. Verdict lives in the commit message.
Slash-picker test: imagine the prompt appears in a picker alongside your existing prompts. Is it discoverable by name? Does the description make its purpose obvious?
Anti-Patterns
| Anti-pattern | Correction |
| Authoring a prompt before its underlying skill exists | Author the skill first; the prompt is the entry-point |
Adding mode: agent to a new prompt | Deprecated per Microsoft Learn spec. Drop it. |
| Bundling unrelated commands into a "menu" prompt | One workflow per prompt |
| Cryptic prompt name | Filename = typing surface. If a user can't guess /<name>, rename. |
| Letting the prompt body grow into a procedure | If you need more than ~10 steps, the workflow belongs in a skill |
Referencing a retired skill in Steps: | Gate 5 semantic failure. Check that step references resolve. |
Falsifiability
This skill's design has failed if any of the following occur within 90 days:
- ≥2 prompts authored using this guide fail
prompt-reviewon first self-audit - No new prompts authored via this guide in 90 days (decorative — sunset)
- Slash-picker discoverability check produces consistent miscalibration (cryptic names accepted, or obvious names rejected) ≥3 times in a quarter
Track as you would any falsified discipline (commit log, retraining notes, or curation ledger if your repo ships one) tagged [PROMPT-CREATOR-MISS].
Related
- prompt-review — the five gates this skill inverts
- skill-creator — sibling for skills; canonical seven-phase scaffold
- instruction-creator — sibling for instructions
- agent-creator — sibling for agents
- act-pass — required for medium-stakes prompt authoring
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.

