agentleFS
kidowkidow/skills/perfect-prompt/SKILL.md

perfect-prompt

Skill2 starsChanged 6 months agoMITView on GitHub

Stress-test and refine user prompts until they are specific, unambiguous, and execution-ready. Use when the user asks to improve, validate, critique, rewrite, or make a perfect prompt, or when they mention prompt quality, ambiguity, missing context, unclear requirements, or prompt engineering.

The file

Show its rules and text

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

14 rules. About 0 are common, 14 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈14

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Do not rewrite immediately if the prompt is underspecified.

    line 12
  2. Distinctive:

    Rough: ask for the missing detail that changes the result most.

    line 23
  3. Distinctive:

    Unclear: ask for the goal before rewriting.

    line 25
  4. Distinctive:

    Ask one question at a time until blockers are resolved.

    line 36
  5. Distinctive:

    If the answer can be discovered from the codebase, files, conversation, or provided references, inspect those instead of asking.

    line 38
  6. Distinctive:

    Ask the highest-impact unresolved question first.

    line 44
  7. Distinctive:

    Do not ask about preferences that do not change the final prompt.

    line 45
  8. Distinctive:

    Do not bundle unrelated questions together.

    line 46
  9. Distinctive:

    If the user asks for speed, make reasonable assumptions and label them clearly in the final prompt.

    line 47
  10. Distinctive:

    If the prompt is already good, say so and offer only targeted improvements.

    line 48
  11. Distinctive:

    Do not return a long critique when the user needs a usable prompt.

    line 52
  12. Distinctive:

    Keep the final prompt copy-pasteable.

    line 53
  13. Distinctive:

    If the prompt controls an agent, include when the agent should ask before acting.

    line 56
  14. Distinctive:

    Use this structure when it fits the task:

    line 60

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Perfect Prompt

Goal

Turn a rough prompt into an execution-ready prompt by finding vague wording, missing context, hidden assumptions, weak success criteria, and unnecessary scope.

Do not rewrite immediately if the prompt is underspecified. Interrogate it first.

Workflow

  1. Classify the prompt and choose the next action:
    • Simple: enough context and a clear expected output.
    • Rough: direction exists, but important details are missing.
    • Ambiguous: multiple interpretations could produce different work.
    • Unclear: goal, audience, or output cannot be inferred safely.
  2. Act on the classification:
    • Simple: tighten the wording and return the improved prompt.
    • Rough: ask for the missing detail that changes the result most.
    • Ambiguous: name the competing interpretations, recommend one, then ask.
    • Unclear: ask for the goal before rewriting.
  3. Audit the prompt across these axes:
    • Objective: what outcome should the agent produce?
    • Context: what background, files, audience, constraints, or examples matter?
    • Scope: what is included, excluded, and deferred?
    • Output: format, length, tone, language, artifacts, and acceptance criteria.
    • Process: whether the agent should ask first, research, plan, implement, verify, or stop.
    • Risk: irreversible actions, sensitive data, external calls, cost, credentials, or ambiguity.
  4. Separate blockers from improvements:
    • Blocker: missing information that would change the task, output, or safety boundary.
    • Improvement: detail that would polish the result but is not required to proceed.
  5. Ask one question at a time until blockers are resolved.
  6. For each question, provide a recommended answer the user can accept or edit.
  7. If the answer can be discovered from the codebase, files, conversation, or provided references, inspect those instead of asking.
  8. Rewrite the prompt after blockers are resolved, preserving the user's intent.
  9. Provide the final prompt plus a short change note explaining what was clarified.

Question Rules

  • Ask the highest-impact unresolved question first.
  • Do not ask about preferences that do not change the final prompt.
  • Do not bundle unrelated questions together.
  • If the user asks for speed, make reasonable assumptions and label them clearly in the final prompt.
  • If the prompt is already good, say so and offer only targeted improvements.

Output Rules

  • Do not return a long critique when the user needs a usable prompt.
  • Keep the final prompt copy-pasteable.
  • Preserve requested language, tone, and domain vocabulary unless they weaken clarity.
  • Include assumptions only when they materially affect execution.
  • If the prompt controls an agent, include when the agent should ask before acting.

Final Prompt Shape

Use this structure when it fits the task:

Role: [who the agent should act as]
Goal: [specific outcome]
Context: [relevant background and inputs]
Task: [ordered work to perform]
Constraints: [must / must not rules]
Output: [format, tone, language, length, files]
Verification: [how completion should be checked]
Ask first if: [conditions that require clarification]

For short prompts, collapse this into one concise paragraph.

Quality Bar

A perfect prompt is:

  • Clear enough that two capable agents would produce similar results.
  • Specific about output and success criteria.
  • Explicit about constraints and non-goals.
  • Honest about uncertainty and missing information.
  • Short enough to use, but complete enough to prevent avoidable rework.

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.